5 ms·

Thanks for the thoughtful counter arguments. I concede that there is a false extrapolation into the internet at large (or private institutions at large). I argu

Thanks for the thoughtful counter arguments. I concede that there is a false extrapolation into the internet at large (or private institutions at large). I argue in his favor though that these social media platforms are, for many, their main sources of information. Hence his argument that we should, as a culture, focus on "improving our ability to tell the difference" between information and disinformation. When I hear friends and families share conspiracy theories with me and I read that many people are deeply hesitant to become vaccinated, they cite these instances of YT or FB squashing posts as further proof of the legitimacy. All this is to say that these tech companies simply should not get themselves involved with answering the question of "what is true?". I suspect that disinformation spreads faster on FB/YT/Twitter than information because it is sensational. Humans love to hear stories and are compelled by them more than facts. I second Ben Thompson here that we should focus on learning how to learn and how to parse information. We should learn how to tell when an argument is bifurcated or someone is appealing to ad populum and learn to accept nuance and disagree respectfully.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
> focus on "improving our ability to tell the difference" between information and disinformation. Yes, absolutely. But from my perspective this has nothing to do with the idea of whether Twitter telling you that you cannot post, or flagging your post, is a socially-significant issue that should be considered as some kind of censorship.
neogodless 6y ago
> as a culture, focus on "improving our ability to tell the difference" between information and disinformation This is an idea I continually see presented as a solution. What I have not seen is an executable solution or a provable hypothesis that it is feasible. By no means do I think it's a bad idea. But how do you execute on such an idea?
- smithza 6y ago
  IMO, most cultural deficiencies or 'disease' has to be worked from the inside-out. A healthy community is a strongly-coupled community with a sense of buy-in and accountability. It is formed through neighborhoods, churches, families, mentor-mentee relationships, etc. It is in those fertile grounds that intentional education, mentorship and friendship can help cure the ills. When I hear that we are year-over-year distrusting our neighbors and citizens in deep-red or deep-blue states to do the right thing, we have to learn how to trust again and see each other. It is going to be local. And it is going to be constructive, not destructive.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago

> focus on "improving our ability to tell the difference" between information and disinformation. Yes, absolutely. But from my perspective this has nothing to do with the idea of whether Twitter telling you that you cannot post, or flagging your post, is a socially-significant issue that should be considered as some kind of censorship.

neogodless 6y ago

> as a culture, focus on "improving our ability to tell the difference" between information and disinformation This is an idea I continually see presented as a solution. What I have not seen is an executable solution or a provable hypothesis that it is feasible. By no means do I think it's a bad idea. But how do you execute on such an idea?

smithza 6y ago
IMO, most cultural deficiencies or 'disease' has to be worked from the inside-out. A healthy community is a strongly-coupled community with a sense of buy-in and accountability. It is formed through neighborhoods, churches, families, mentor-mentee relationships, etc. It is in those fertile grounds that intentional education, mentorship and friendship can help cure the ills. When I hear that we are year-over-year distrusting our neighbors and citizens in deep-red or deep-blue states to do the right thing, we have to learn how to trust again and see each other. It is going to be local. And it is going to be constructive, not destructive.