3 ms·
What is the blatantly false proposition? There is a screenshot, and then another screenshot later. This parent comment appears to be blatantly false. Should br
by dvasdekis 7y ago
What is the blatantly false proposition? There is a screenshot, and then another screenshot later.
This parent comment appears to be blatantly false. Should brundolf be banned from HN?
- _bxg1 7y agoThe headline in the OP is "Fox News has stopped reporting on Coronavirus" and then goes on to extrapolate that to a far-fetched conspiracy theory. Several people have chimed in saying that the virus is all over FN's front page, it's just no longer the very most prominent headline. So even the base fact is verifiably false. That's the definition of fake news. And this site goes beyond that and tries to incite conspiracy-thinking based on this false fact.
- dvasdekis 7y agoI actually agree. We should hold HN posts to a standard of truthfulness, and perhaps this submission's headline does not meet that standard (irrespective of the contents of the screenshots). But in supporting this argument, my question is then: What standards apply to whom? Are all opinion and thought pieces, given that they are not verifiable, and they are inherently trying to change the opinion of the reader, therefore conspiracy thinking? If not, what is the definition? If conspiracy-thinking is the view that organisations are not operating in the best interests of the individual, one person's conspiracy-thinking is therefore another person's whistleblowing. Thoughts?
- _bxg1 7y agoI would define "conspiracy-thinking" as belief-forming that's driven by fear, even if its proposition can't be totally disproved (truthfully, nothing can). Or, if you like, belief-forming that neglects to apply Occam's Razor. But that's an inherently subjective thing. So the only thing that's important in this case is the intentional propagation of false information.