5 ms·

I don’t think that’s true. Twitter is/was the only remaining news medium where experts had a voice. During the pandemic doctors and infectious diseases experts

by rdtwo 4y ago

I don’t think that’s true. Twitter is/was the only remaining news medium where experts had a voice. During the pandemic doctors and infectious diseases experts were using it to call or government blow hards. Now that’s going to die as well and we may return to complete darkness.

devwastaken 4y ago
I saw the opposite. "Experts" being totally wrong and fear mongering without evidence. It was rural governments that said "prove it". Recall how various studies on covid lethality, vaccination and masks were wildly different. The Israel study is a quick one. This is exactly what happened when influenza was new in the 1920's. Yet the "experts" made it sound like everyone is going to die if you are not wearing a mask 24/7 and isolating. This is what "do no harm" ideology becomes - causing mass harm to everyone to potentially protect a few.
- TheRealDunkirk 4y ago
  I see Twitter as possibly working up to the ideal of "crowd sourcing" the truth. If Musk does what he seems to be saying he will do -- and take the training wheels off the moderation, and get the government out of it -- we might be left with a system that really can sort out the truth from fiction. Or, at least, present both sides, and let people decide for themselves, without hiding one side.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - nikau 4y ago
    I'm sure it will be just as successful as the voat platform was.
- goldenchrome 4y ago
  Absolutely based. There are more morale virtues than just “prevent harm”.
- systemvoltage 4y ago
  What you’re witnessing on HN and elsewhere is politics masquerading as objective and ostensibly, a thoughtful discourse. None of the articles on HN have much of good faith discussion. I just see it as “progressives are pissed because their platform of power is being seized”. A lot of that relied on platform censorship on places like Twitter. Just now, the WhiteHouse account is being fact checked. That doesn’t sit well with progressives. This isn't some conspiracy theory, we have the current Biden Administration working with Big Tech to censor speech. "Public health" is just a trope under far more insiduous political agenda for power: https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformation-dhs/ https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformat...
  - cronix 4y ago
    > Just now, the WhiteHouse account is being fact checked. That doesn’t sit well with progressives. And the WH deleted some of those tweets after being fact checked. White House Deletes Misleading Tweet Giving Biden Credit For Social Security Check Raise: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/11/02/white-house-deletes-misleading-tweet-giving-biden-credit-for-social-security-check-raise/?sh=67f990f71750 https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/11/02/whit...
    - systemvoltage 4y ago
      Isn't White House supposed to keep records? They are not supposed to delete stuff. The white house press releases have been a total disaster. I thought we had it bad in the previous admin. Lies after lies told to American public. Much of this stuff goes unchallenged on all social media.
- sophacles 4y ago
  If you believe "influenza was new in the 1920's", you have bigger things to worry about than this discussion. I suggest going to check on the paperwork for that bridge you bought.
- andrei_says_ 4y ago
  Maybe we have different definitions for “expert”? I’ve been following epidemiology experts and no one implied “everyone dying”, nor recommended “24/7” mask wearing (rather cited lowered transmission rates) and yes isolation lowered transmission rates too. The flak they had to take for inconveniencing the lifestyle of people in the interest of prioritizing health outcomes for all, is insane. If anything, we learned that the thought of care for others at a small cost to the self is extremely triggering for many Americans and is easily politicized as a wedge issue to influence voting.
  - rdtwo 4y ago
    Agreed , the experts showed us that a minor lifestyle change can significantly reduce covid transmission. Instead we as a country did all the wrong things and blamed experts when government officials failed by instituting random non evidence based policies
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tgv 4y ago
Complete darkness? O no, not the dark ages before 2006, when we had walk uphill to school and uphill to go back home. Or I could try to more direct and say: that's utter crap. > Twitter is/was the only remaining news medium And twitter is an important reason that other, more reliable and informative news outlets went under.
- rdtwo 4y ago
  There were still some newspapers left in 2006. By 2022 they are all basically dead. Also standards of journalism integrity were bad then but they are abysmal now. Very few journalists actually investigate stories, most just re print press release.
  - oezi 4y ago
    That's just blatantly wrong. There is still great journalism out there and the depth and breath of quality news is now reaching farther than ever before. But of course you are right: who could have foreseen how much bad news people want to read and how little they want to pay for quality news. Why do people watch Fox or read Murdock media rags?

by rdtwo 4y ago

devwastaken 4y ago

I saw the opposite. "Experts" being totally wrong and fear mongering without evidence. It was rural governments that said "prove it". Recall how various studies on covid lethality, vaccination and masks were wildly different. The Israel study is a quick one. This is exactly what happened when influenza was new in the 1920's. Yet the "experts" made it sound like everyone is going to die if you are not wearing a mask 24/7 and isolating. This is what "do no harm" ideology becomes - causing mass harm to everyone to potentially protect a few.

TheRealDunkirk 4y ago
I see Twitter as possibly working up to the ideal of "crowd sourcing" the truth. If Musk does what he seems to be saying he will do -- and take the training wheels off the moderation, and get the government out of it -- we might be left with a system that really can sort out the truth from fiction. Or, at least, present both sides, and let people decide for themselves, without hiding one side.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nikau 4y ago
  I'm sure it will be just as successful as the voat platform was.
goldenchrome 4y ago
Absolutely based. There are more morale virtues than just “prevent harm”.
systemvoltage 4y ago
What you’re witnessing on HN and elsewhere is politics masquerading as objective and ostensibly, a thoughtful discourse. None of the articles on HN have much of good faith discussion. I just see it as “progressives are pissed because their platform of power is being seized”. A lot of that relied on platform censorship on places like Twitter. Just now, the WhiteHouse account is being fact checked. That doesn’t sit well with progressives. This isn't some conspiracy theory, we have the current Biden Administration working with Big Tech to censor speech. "Public health" is just a trope under far more insiduous political agenda for power: https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformation-dhs/ https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformat...
- cronix 4y ago
  > Just now, the WhiteHouse account is being fact checked. That doesn’t sit well with progressives. And the WH deleted some of those tweets after being fact checked. White House Deletes Misleading Tweet Giving Biden Credit For Social Security Check Raise: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/11/02/white-house-deletes-misleading-tweet-giving-biden-credit-for-social-security-check-raise/?sh=67f990f71750 https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/11/02/whit...
  - systemvoltage 4y ago
    Isn't White House supposed to keep records? They are not supposed to delete stuff. The white house press releases have been a total disaster. I thought we had it bad in the previous admin. Lies after lies told to American public. Much of this stuff goes unchallenged on all social media.
sophacles 4y ago
If you believe "influenza was new in the 1920's", you have bigger things to worry about than this discussion. I suggest going to check on the paperwork for that bridge you bought.
andrei_says_ 4y ago
Maybe we have different definitions for “expert”? I’ve been following epidemiology experts and no one implied “everyone dying”, nor recommended “24/7” mask wearing (rather cited lowered transmission rates) and yes isolation lowered transmission rates too. The flak they had to take for inconveniencing the lifestyle of people in the interest of prioritizing health outcomes for all, is insane. If anything, we learned that the thought of care for others at a small cost to the self is extremely triggering for many Americans and is easily politicized as a wedge issue to influence voting.
- rdtwo 4y ago
  Agreed , the experts showed us that a minor lifestyle change can significantly reduce covid transmission. Instead we as a country did all the wrong things and blamed experts when government officials failed by instituting random non evidence based policies

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

tgv 4y ago

Complete darkness? O no, not the dark ages before 2006, when we had walk uphill to school and uphill to go back home. Or I could try to more direct and say: that's utter crap. > Twitter is/was the only remaining news medium And twitter is an important reason that other, more reliable and informative news outlets went under.

rdtwo 4y ago
There were still some newspapers left in 2006. By 2022 they are all basically dead. Also standards of journalism integrity were bad then but they are abysmal now. Very few journalists actually investigate stories, most just re print press release.
- oezi 4y ago
  That's just blatantly wrong. There is still great journalism out there and the depth and breath of quality news is now reaching farther than ever before. But of course you are right: who could have foreseen how much bad news people want to read and how little they want to pay for quality news. Why do people watch Fox or read Murdock media rags?