3 ms·
I’m not buying into this article. Twitter for example isn’t reining this “opinion power”, the bad actors (certain “politicians”) are the ones reining the opinio
by joshribakoff 6y ago
I’m not buying into this article. Twitter for example isn’t reining this “opinion power”, the bad actors (certain “politicians”) are the ones reining the opinion power. Placing a warning label that a politician is saying something factually inaccurate isn’t reining opinion power
Additionally the title is very click bait. There is no data or any kind of citations that can be used to conclude attempts to regulate misinformation amplify the bad actors efforts as the title would imply, in fact the paper attempts to point at other countries that have regulated things like child pornography and hate speech which is pretty unrelated to the matter of regulating misinformation
- mc32 6y agoThe thing is the warnings may not be applied equally. Or even if they are applied equally to all liars, some claims may in retrospect turn out right and then the warning turns out to have been wrong.
- joshribakoff 6y agoTo me this just sounds like an argument against fact checking in general, all this is also true of any third party fact checking service, either way someone can be politically slighted, but also anyone is free to start their own third party fact checking service (at least in a free society)
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoIt is true of any fact checking service. It's important, then, that there be more than one. Any single oracle of truth becomes a single point of attack for liars, propagandists, and suppressors of truth.
- raxxorrax 6y agoI do think the measures were counter productive, but it is hard to get any quantifiable data on this. I think the currency was trust, the product very expensive and the result a catastrophe. Sa sdorowje! And the invoice doesn't only include trust, it also includes freedom.