3 ms·
Some the problems are old... and some are new. The old press was broadcast-only and had to catter to the lowest common denominator. As a result, at least some
by spion 5y ago
Some the problems are old... and some are new.
The old press was broadcast-only and had to catter to the lowest common denominator. As a result, at least some people were immune.
The new "press" is crowdsourced and tailored just for you. Social media doesn't even have to do research on what works or what doesn't on who. Natural selection by means of retweeting does all the work. You can find misinformation of all levels of sophistication, all the way to incorrect scientific papers if thats your shtick. (It will mostly be based on reading abstract conclusions in those cases without checking quality of methodology, or on whatever the funding intrests of big companies are)
- dragontamer 5y ago> You can find misinformation of all levels of sophistication, all the way to incorrect scientific papers if thats your shtick. This isn't new at all. "More doctors smoke Camel Cigarettes". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI And the Tobacco industry funded all types of scientific papers, that were published all over the place to demonstrate Tobacco's "health benefits". ------- The only reason we can't find examples older than maybe the mid 1900s or so, was because doctors weren't even trusted until the 1900s. 1800s doctors were well recognized as quacks and had very little reputation among the American people. So there was no reason to use doctors as a propaganda point back then.
- spion 5y agoRight, except now its not just pathological aspects of capitalism causing the problem - its democratized. Now everyone can misinterpret papers in novel an exciting ways that are likely to spread far and wide.