4 ms·

You can't just "enforce correct news" because people will just accuse it of being part of the left-wing media conspiracy (which is, largely but not completely,

You can't just "enforce correct news" because people will just accuse it of being part of the left-wing media conspiracy (which is, largely but not completely, a fallacy). EDIT: Not sure why downvotes (currently at -4). Here is what typically happens when I try to point to "facts" (linked assertions) that invalidate someone's point: 1) Person says bullshit 2) I show person link from credible source that seems to invalidate the bullshit At this point one of 5 things invariably happens: A) The source I linked to is not read, wasting my time B) The goalposts are now moved to some OTHER bullshit assertion C) The source is accused of being "bought and paid for" (this literally happened to me when I was blocked by someone on Facebook for using factcheck and politifact links). D) "Wikipedia is editable by anyone!" E) "That's just MSM conspiracy talk!" https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/74/Conspiracy_Theory https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla... We have a situation where the far-left and the far-right (but mostly the far-right) are basically being gaslighted by their sources of media. Maybe the solution is not to enforce The One And True Source Of Facts, but to teach people how to fucking lose an argument gracefully. Or at least, to "compete" on rational/empirical grounds. And gracefully win or lose on those grounds, and not just on "what I believe". And, for the record (and to my point), regarding the "news is slightly left-wing-biased" claim, third-party media bias reviewers have all rated the major news sources, at least in the U.S. (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN) as left-leaning, save for Faux News of course. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/nbc-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/nbc-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/abc-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/abc-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cbs-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cbs-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

wil421 8y ago
I was happy when the Fake News stuff started to take off. Then I saw politicians use it anytime they wanted to discredit something, especially legitimate criticism.
- sudomakeup 8y ago
  Thats how I feel about russia-gate. "Criticizing the corporate democrats and exposing their records? You must be a russian shill!"
setquk 8y ago
Unfortunately you’re right. This plugin triggers on daily mail which should start the crazies off pretty sharpish.
- ilaksh 8y ago
  I have heard a lot of bad things about Daily Mail but the fact that you are describing people who have a different worldivew than you as "crazy" is very problematic.
  - setquk 8y ago
    Go read the comments on the articles and make your own judgement. Here’s a starter https://m.imgur.com/80iDatZ https://m.imgur.com/80iDatZ DM comments section is the cesspit of humanity.
    - ilaksh 8y ago
      Obviously suggesting that people be murdered is completely out of line. However I have seen that type of comment made by both the left and the right. I still think you are mainly identifying that people have a very different worldview and devaluing them mostly because of that. Comments that are completely out of line are just reinforcing an existing hatred of this other group.
      - setquk 8y ago
        That’s a relatively mild example of what goes on. The problem is that DM bait extremist views to bolster their own readership. This isn’t an interest specified readership but a relatively hardcore propaganda machine. Check the backers as well.
      - lordCarbonFiber 8y ago
        There's a point where bending over backwards for "world views" crosses the line. Where that might be is hard to say, but Im going to venture that advocating (mass) murder is definitely on the wrong side of things. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion.
kryogen1c 8y ago
That's true, but not the core problem. Truth is not a well-defined concept, nor is it _definable_. For example, multiple well-designed studies on drugs are required because different studies produce different results. The idea that all good studies produce all good results on all good drugs is simply not true. It is true to say that someone has been given autism by a vaccine - is publishing that true story and enciting antivax movements fake news? Is it right to suppress all antivax news as fake? IMO, it seems that journalistic integrity is at an all time low (an existence created by a reactionary and unthoughtful public). I think starting censorship programs on an already sickly media can be nothing short of a catastrophe.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  Good thing is that we also have pruth. It is similar to truth. It consists of the most accurate description of reality that can be known. > Is it right to suppress all antivax news as fake? pruth requires any intrinsic context, so it would be fake if you look at the rate of occurrences. I agree with you statement about journalism but don't see any reactionaries as guilty. To me, it is a story about money. Can't say if that is the pruth though. And no, more censorship wouldn't be good since the pruth will come out eventually and any trust would be further eradicated.

wil421 8y ago

I was happy when the Fake News stuff started to take off. Then I saw politicians use it anytime they wanted to discredit something, especially legitimate criticism.

sudomakeup 8y ago
Thats how I feel about russia-gate. "Criticizing the corporate democrats and exposing their records? You must be a russian shill!"

setquk 8y ago

Unfortunately you’re right. This plugin triggers on daily mail which should start the crazies off pretty sharpish.

ilaksh 8y ago
I have heard a lot of bad things about Daily Mail but the fact that you are describing people who have a different worldivew than you as "crazy" is very problematic.
- setquk 8y ago
  Go read the comments on the articles and make your own judgement. Here’s a starter https://m.imgur.com/80iDatZ https://m.imgur.com/80iDatZ DM comments section is the cesspit of humanity.
  - ilaksh 8y ago
    Obviously suggesting that people be murdered is completely out of line. However I have seen that type of comment made by both the left and the right. I still think you are mainly identifying that people have a very different worldview and devaluing them mostly because of that. Comments that are completely out of line are just reinforcing an existing hatred of this other group.
    - setquk 8y ago
      That’s a relatively mild example of what goes on. The problem is that DM bait extremist views to bolster their own readership. This isn’t an interest specified readership but a relatively hardcore propaganda machine. Check the backers as well.
    - lordCarbonFiber 8y ago
      There's a point where bending over backwards for "world views" crosses the line. Where that might be is hard to say, but Im going to venture that advocating (mass) murder is definitely on the wrong side of things. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion.

kryogen1c 8y ago

That's true, but not the core problem. Truth is not a well-defined concept, nor is it _definable_. For example, multiple well-designed studies on drugs are required because different studies produce different results. The idea that all good studies produce all good results on all good drugs is simply not true. It is true to say that someone has been given autism by a vaccine - is publishing that true story and enciting antivax movements fake news? Is it right to suppress all antivax news as fake? IMO, it seems that journalistic integrity is at an all time low (an existence created by a reactionary and unthoughtful public). I think starting censorship programs on an already sickly media can be nothing short of a catastrophe.

raxxorrax 8y ago
Good thing is that we also have pruth. It is similar to truth. It consists of the most accurate description of reality that can be known. > Is it right to suppress all antivax news as fake? pruth requires any intrinsic context, so it would be fake if you look at the rate of occurrences. I agree with you statement about journalism but don't see any reactionaries as guilty. To me, it is a story about money. Can't say if that is the pruth though. And no, more censorship wouldn't be good since the pruth will come out eventually and any trust would be further eradicated.