4 ms·

I find that Revisionist History (ironically) is particularly guilty of not fact-checking. In their episode “Blame Game”[1] they discuss how the vast majority o

I find that Revisionist History (ironically) is particularly guilty of not fact-checking. In their episode “Blame Game”[1] they discuss how the vast majority of “brake failure” is actually due to driver error (pedal misapplication). They then vocally blame Consumer Reports for spreading “dangerous misinformation” — CR says that drivers should keep their pedal pressed hard on the brake. Revisionist History instead says that drivers should take their foot off what they think is the brake and try finding it again. Consumer Reports again counters this[2] by describing that if you believe you have your foot on the brake, you best not take it off, or you will lose power braking and be unable to stop. (Power braking takes time to regenerate.) Revisionist History does not counterargue, but doesn’t update their podcast to provide a full and honest view of the situation either. What is it about podcasts that makes them speak with such an air of authority? Are they riding the wave of trustworthy investigative radio journalism, ala NPR? Is it the low-pass voice filters and pop filters in front of the microphone that remind us of these journalists and make us inadvertently attribute the same sense of respect to podcasters? Furthermore, in online discussions, an argument can only go so deep down the rabbit hole before it loses sight of the original point. Misinformation requires magnitudes more effort to correct than it is to cause. How do we deal with this as a society? [1]: http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/08-blame-game http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/08-blame-game [2]: https://www.consumerreports.org/cars-malcolm-gladwell-mistakenly-blames-drivers-toyota-unintended-acceleration/ https://www.consumerreports.org/cars-malcolm-gladwell-mistak...

kbenson 7y ago
Oh, I think that's just how Gkadwell is. He's much less interested in making sure the examples he's using to make a point are valid and correct than he is in using powerful examples for the sake of them being interesting themselves. I live the series, but it became clear to me in the first season you can't rely on him to explore all aspects of something,or be unbiased. He's not presenting a thesis (as much as he loves to present his work in this fashion), he is editorializing. His threshold for how important some mitigating evidence must be to be considered is much higher than I would expect any actual news service to be, so he leaves a lot of avenues unexplored that are inconvenient to his point. But, as I said, I love the series. I view it like talking to that friend who will come up with an idea and immediately passionately defend it, even when you suspect they aren't that tied to it, but just love arguing the point. Fun to partake, can be thought provoking, but don't expect anything to be fully thought out and explored, that's homework for you if you're inclined. :)

kbenson 7y ago

Oh, I think that's just how Gkadwell is. He's much less interested in making sure the examples he's using to make a point are valid and correct than he is in using powerful examples for the sake of them being interesting themselves. I live the series, but it became clear to me in the first season you can't rely on him to explore all aspects of something,or be unbiased. He's not presenting a thesis (as much as he loves to present his work in this fashion), he is editorializing. His threshold for how important some mitigating evidence must be to be considered is much higher than I would expect any actual news service to be, so he leaves a lot of avenues unexplored that are inconvenient to his point. But, as I said, I love the series. I view it like talking to that friend who will come up with an idea and immediately passionately defend it, even when you suspect they aren't that tied to it, but just love arguing the point. Fun to partake, can be thought provoking, but don't expect anything to be fully thought out and explored, that's homework for you if you're inclined. :)