4 ms·

> The icon would provide users an assessment of the news outlet's ratio of fact versus fiction and reporting versus opinion. Yes, we should always trust powerf

by sjeohp 9y ago

> The icon would provide users an assessment of the news outlet's ratio of fact versus fiction and reporting versus opinion. Yes, we should always trust powerful institutions to tell us what the truth is...

jonny_eh 9y ago
I agree, sans-sarcasm. It's better than the alternative, which is allowing Russian disinformation to determine facts.
- sjeohp 9y ago
  Absolutely. Such institutions have never abused such power in the past and surely never will. They would never use fear to manipulate public discourse for example.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    Absolutely right! We should definitely shut down all Department of Education educational minimums as well! Those are just used to control the populace anyway. And the FDA? That's just a way to control what we put in our bodies! The SEC and financial regulations? When's the last time they helped anyone? ... That was sarcasm, in case someone is experiencing a Poe moment. In all these cases, the rules and regulations help some more than others, and may even be abused to help those with connections. That doesn't mean the institutions do not impart a net benefit to the country, and in many cases many orders of magnitude more than the problems they cause (in my opinion, at least). A n agency with clear and transparent rules as to how to score institutions and what is considered true and what is considered false could do some real good. It could also be abused, but I don't think the idea should be immediately discounted before we explore how it might work a bit more in depth.
- factsaresacred 9y ago
  > It's better than the alternative, which is allowing Russian disinformation to determine facts. No it's not better. "Russian disinformation" is a bullshit term to describe overblown and mostly ineffective tactics used by just about all governments. Disinformation clogs the web. From WaPo to NYT to Salon to [insert media outlet here]. The very same bozos who sold you the Iraq war. The dumbness of American discourse is almost too much to bear. Your shining city upon a hill apparently can't handle $100,000 worth of targeted ads. It's embarrassing.
  - rhcom2 9y ago
    That's the line Trump loves to get people to believe, that random fake blogs are equal to newspapers in their disinformation. And why investigate it? Everyone is just as bad /s
    - AlexandrB 9y ago
      > And why investigate it? Everyone is just as bad /s I find the same is true of discussions about tech companies and privacy: "Oh they're all stealing all your data anyway, so why bother choosing on that basis." The irony, of course, is that this subtly undermines the premise of capitalism and especially Libertarianism (I get this from libertarian friends a lot). If you claim that my choice of search provider is meaningless, how can the market self-correct if people start to value privacy?
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > "Russian disinformation" is a bullshit term to describe overblown and mostly ineffective tactics used by just about all governments. No, the particular aggressive global propaganda (approach and scale) by the Putin regime had become a wide concern even before any discussion of it being directly targeted on the US election. See, e.g., https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html

by sjeohp 9y ago

jonny_eh 9y ago

I agree, sans-sarcasm. It's better than the alternative, which is allowing Russian disinformation to determine facts.

sjeohp 9y ago
Absolutely. Such institutions have never abused such power in the past and surely never will. They would never use fear to manipulate public discourse for example.
- kbenson 9y ago
  Absolutely right! We should definitely shut down all Department of Education educational minimums as well! Those are just used to control the populace anyway. And the FDA? That's just a way to control what we put in our bodies! The SEC and financial regulations? When's the last time they helped anyone? ... That was sarcasm, in case someone is experiencing a Poe moment. In all these cases, the rules and regulations help some more than others, and may even be abused to help those with connections. That doesn't mean the institutions do not impart a net benefit to the country, and in many cases many orders of magnitude more than the problems they cause (in my opinion, at least). A n agency with clear and transparent rules as to how to score institutions and what is considered true and what is considered false could do some real good. It could also be abused, but I don't think the idea should be immediately discounted before we explore how it might work a bit more in depth.
factsaresacred 9y ago
> It's better than the alternative, which is allowing Russian disinformation to determine facts. No it's not better. "Russian disinformation" is a bullshit term to describe overblown and mostly ineffective tactics used by just about all governments. Disinformation clogs the web. From WaPo to NYT to Salon to [insert media outlet here]. The very same bozos who sold you the Iraq war. The dumbness of American discourse is almost too much to bear. Your shining city upon a hill apparently can't handle $100,000 worth of targeted ads. It's embarrassing.
- rhcom2 9y ago
  That's the line Trump loves to get people to believe, that random fake blogs are equal to newspapers in their disinformation. And why investigate it? Everyone is just as bad /s
  - AlexandrB 9y ago
    > And why investigate it? Everyone is just as bad /s I find the same is true of discussions about tech companies and privacy: "Oh they're all stealing all your data anyway, so why bother choosing on that basis." The irony, of course, is that this subtly undermines the premise of capitalism and especially Libertarianism (I get this from libertarian friends a lot). If you claim that my choice of search provider is meaningless, how can the market self-correct if people start to value privacy?
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > "Russian disinformation" is a bullshit term to describe overblown and mostly ineffective tactics used by just about all governments. No, the particular aggressive global propaganda (approach and scale) by the Putin regime had become a wide concern even before any discussion of it being directly targeted on the US election. See, e.g., https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html