3 ms·

The majority of “misinformation” I’ve seen (entirely on reddit) isn’t straight up lies. It’s more like reposting an old article on a current topic or leaving ou

by soared 6y ago

The majority of “misinformation” I’ve seen (entirely on reddit) isn’t straight up lies. It’s more like reposting an old article on a current topic or leaving out information. When Harvard announced remote class plans, Reddit had a front page article on r/all about it - but it was an article that was a month old about their old plan. It would be so easy for people to read that title (old info), have their friend ask if they saw the news about Harvard, and then have basically been manipulated by misinformation.

zentiggr 6y ago
Well, that's a bit broad interpretation of 'manipulated'. If someone legitimately didn't know that there was more recent information, and made that post, it would be reasonable to post the more up to date info in whatever way makes it most helpful. Any information you get from anywhere but your own senses needs to be checked in proportion to its timeliness, relevance, sources, bias, all the usual. It's only that the current Internet speed has so much potentially coming at you that makes it a more complicated triage plan.
ardy42 6y ago
> The majority of “misinformation” I’ve seen (entirely on reddit) isn’t straight up lies. It’s more like reposting an old article on a current topic or leaving out information. IIRC, that's a key tactic for spreading disinformation. It's most disruptive when it contains 1% truth and 99% lies than when it's 100% lies. Take PizzaGate for instance: the pizza parlor in question exists, has a lot of connections to various politicians, and was directly talked about in the leaked Podesta emails. Those facts add a little bit of believability that makes it easier to suck people into the big lie.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  It is even more insidious when it include 90% Truth, omitting a critical 10%.
jimbokun 6y ago
So like the classic game of "telephone", but amplified by a million by the Internet. You make a good point, in that this is likely the source of even more disinformation than deliberately placed "fake news".

by soared 6y ago

zentiggr 6y ago

Well, that's a bit broad interpretation of 'manipulated'. If someone legitimately didn't know that there was more recent information, and made that post, it would be reasonable to post the more up to date info in whatever way makes it most helpful. Any information you get from anywhere but your own senses needs to be checked in proportion to its timeliness, relevance, sources, bias, all the usual. It's only that the current Internet speed has so much potentially coming at you that makes it a more complicated triage plan.

ardy42 6y ago

> The majority of “misinformation” I’ve seen (entirely on reddit) isn’t straight up lies. It’s more like reposting an old article on a current topic or leaving out information. IIRC, that's a key tactic for spreading disinformation. It's most disruptive when it contains 1% truth and 99% lies than when it's 100% lies. Take PizzaGate for instance: the pizza parlor in question exists, has a lot of connections to various politicians, and was directly talked about in the leaked Podesta emails. Those facts add a little bit of believability that makes it easier to suck people into the big lie.

s1artibartfast 6y ago
It is even more insidious when it include 90% Truth, omitting a critical 10%.

jimbokun 6y ago

So like the classic game of "telephone", but amplified by a million by the Internet. You make a good point, in that this is likely the source of even more disinformation than deliberately placed "fake news".