4 ms·

The major issue with social media right now is that people put an absurd amount of trust into them. It’s a new medium, like radio or TV, which also were major s

The major issue with social media right now is that people put an absurd amount of trust into them. It’s a new medium, like radio or TV, which also were major sources of misinformation. As time goes on, people will put less and less stock into sources of information that have proven faulty in the past. However, I think this kind of thing takes way longer than anyone thinks, and will play out over many years or decades.

Loughla 6y ago
>It’s a new medium, like radio or TV, which also were major sources of misinformation. >people will put less and less stock into sources of information that have proven faulty in the past. Do you have any idea of the number of people who inherently trust a 'fact' because it was on a radio or television program? I'm not sure that your assessment is correct. I think what we're seeing is what we see with TV, there is just less of a way to track it with those stations. - when I buy cable, I get both left and right news stations. I only watch one, but nobody but me knows that. When I use social media, I can access right and left, but everyone can see what I access, and the people who see it can cater their message to me specifically. Anyway, I think you're wrong. I don't believe people inherently distrust traditional media. I think they distrust traditional media they don't agree with.
- Izkata 6y ago
  > Do you have any idea of the number of people who inherently trust a 'fact' because it was on a radio or television program? Back when it was new? More than you'd think: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(1938_radio_drama)#Public_reaction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(1938_...
- Bukhmanizer 6y ago
  I’m not saying people no longer trust traditional news sources, but there is a difference in degrees that has to be appreciated. Think about the way that FDR used his “fireside chats” to directly message the American people. By making them feel like he was speaking directly to them, many Americans felt like they were given access to a greater level of transparency of government. 50 years later, Reagan and Clinton both still made regular radio addresses, but failed to control their narratives the same way FDR did. Why? Because by that time the farce was up. Most Americans knew that radio wasn’t some intimate conversation between the president and them. There was a greater cynicism about the medium, everyone knew that lying was just as easy over the radio as compared to written statements. Now think about how many assumptions people make about social media. Even forums like Hackernews. You’ve engaged with me, so you probably have made several assumptions about me. 1. I’m an actual person and not a bot 2. I am personally commenting my opinion and not the opinions of someone who has compelled my opinion 3. I am arguing in good faith 4. I am a single person, not multiple people with the same account. I’ve made the same assumptions about you. But the funny thing is that NONE of these things is guaranteed to be true. And in some cases it’s not even likely that all of these things are true. Eventually people will stop making these assumptions, and learn to mistrust the Internet to the degree that they probably should.

Loughla 6y ago

>It’s a new medium, like radio or TV, which also were major sources of misinformation. >people will put less and less stock into sources of information that have proven faulty in the past. Do you have any idea of the number of people who inherently trust a 'fact' because it was on a radio or television program? I'm not sure that your assessment is correct. I think what we're seeing is what we see with TV, there is just less of a way to track it with those stations. - when I buy cable, I get both left and right news stations. I only watch one, but nobody but me knows that. When I use social media, I can access right and left, but everyone can see what I access, and the people who see it can cater their message to me specifically. Anyway, I think you're wrong. I don't believe people inherently distrust traditional media. I think they distrust traditional media they don't agree with.

Izkata 6y ago
> Do you have any idea of the number of people who inherently trust a 'fact' because it was on a radio or television program? Back when it was new? More than you'd think: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(1938_radio_drama)#Public_reaction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(1938_...
Bukhmanizer 6y ago
I’m not saying people no longer trust traditional news sources, but there is a difference in degrees that has to be appreciated. Think about the way that FDR used his “fireside chats” to directly message the American people. By making them feel like he was speaking directly to them, many Americans felt like they were given access to a greater level of transparency of government. 50 years later, Reagan and Clinton both still made regular radio addresses, but failed to control their narratives the same way FDR did. Why? Because by that time the farce was up. Most Americans knew that radio wasn’t some intimate conversation between the president and them. There was a greater cynicism about the medium, everyone knew that lying was just as easy over the radio as compared to written statements. Now think about how many assumptions people make about social media. Even forums like Hackernews. You’ve engaged with me, so you probably have made several assumptions about me. 1. I’m an actual person and not a bot 2. I am personally commenting my opinion and not the opinions of someone who has compelled my opinion 3. I am arguing in good faith 4. I am a single person, not multiple people with the same account. I’ve made the same assumptions about you. But the funny thing is that NONE of these things is guaranteed to be true. And in some cases it’s not even likely that all of these things are true. Eventually people will stop making these assumptions, and learn to mistrust the Internet to the degree that they probably should.