3 ms·
The difference is that Twitter and Facebook "launder" sources by putting their banner at the top. A sensationalist newspaper piece is typically grounded in some
by minikites 6y ago
The difference is that Twitter and Facebook "launder" sources by putting their banner at the top. A sensationalist newspaper piece is typically grounded in some reality, but it appears in your "feed" right next to completely unmoored conspiracy theories from your loonier aunts and uncles. To a passive consumer it all blends together. Even for the active consumer, most them don't have enough information literacy skills to tell the difference or critically examine sources.
- rich_sasha 6y agoThis was apparently a recognised KGB propaganda method abroad. Sponsor semi-respectable news sources, and have them quote arbitrarily unreliable articles from elsewhere. Literally information laundering. I read about it somewhere in an article about ZeroHedge practices, I can't quite find a link now. EDIT: link: https://streetwiseprofessor.com/how-do-you-know-that-zero-hedge-is-a-russian-information-operation-heres-how/comment-page-1/ https://streetwiseprofessor.com/how-do-you-know-that-zero-he...
- Applejinx 6y agoObviously continuing to this day. Thanks for bringing this up: it does seem to be an effective tactic.
- Viliam1234 6y agoYeah. Newspapers after some time develop reputation. So you buy X, but you wouldn't touch Y, no matter the headline. Then "social media" take a bit of this and a bit of that, and put it all next to each other.