3 ms·

The Dallas shopping center shooting was the first time in my life I couldn’t tell the difference between online truth and lies. I’m very good as finding out the

The Dallas shopping center shooting was the first time in my life I couldn’t tell the difference between online truth and lies. I’m very good as finding out the truth vs lies but this time I couldn’t. Usually disinformation is easy to spot but this time it came out so fast that I had no idea what was real vs fake. It’s a scary time to be living in when you have no idea what is real anymore.

Roark66 3y ago
Personally after I was involved with some "news" that was then reported completely wrong (not by malice, but pure incompetence) I've stopped believing anything I read or hear in the media. This was 25 years ago and the trend has only increased. Yes, there is quite a bit of fakery, but 99% of "bad news" is a result of the: 1. No expectation by the public credible sources are quoted when news are reported. 2. Reporters not knowing their arse from their elbow. 2. Their editor/writers"trying to spice it up a little". 3. The speakers making bloody mistake after mistake when reading from a teleprompter in the most important stuff. 4. Other media picking it up and adding their own spin. It's like "Chinese whisper". I can't count the number of times my partner tells me when I come home "have you heard, there is this horribly stupid law that is coming into effect next month". Then I check, and it's not a law, but a proposal, it hasn't been even accepted to be discussed yet and the details are completely different too. I understand, not many smart people these days go into "traditional news reporting". It's a pity, because good news reporting is a prerequisite of a well functioning democratic society It will only get worse, as revenue from traditional news drops they'll be more and more dssperate to make money the only way they can, by increasing the emotional load of the stuff they report. Everything has to be extreme, outraging, horrible etc.
- quesera 3y ago
  > I can't count the number of times my partner tells me when I come home "have you heard, there is this horribly stupid law that is coming into effect next month". Then I check, and it's not a law, but a proposal, it hasn't been even accepted to be discussed yet and the details are completely different too. It's certainly not the only source of error, but I find that the answer to my first question ("What, where did you read about that?") is almost always "Facebook". It's become a running joke in my household. It turns out though that some people read news as entertainment, and don't really care if it's particularly true. This is probably fine, but it breaks down when the evoked response is outrage instead of a laugh.
piloto_ciego 3y ago
Arguably there are epistemological reasons why this has always been the case; we don’t know much of anything - we’re limited in time and space. Acceptance of this and trying to use your best judgement is the key here. Just do your best.

Roark66 3y ago

Personally after I was involved with some "news" that was then reported completely wrong (not by malice, but pure incompetence) I've stopped believing anything I read or hear in the media. This was 25 years ago and the trend has only increased. Yes, there is quite a bit of fakery, but 99% of "bad news" is a result of the: 1. No expectation by the public credible sources are quoted when news are reported. 2. Reporters not knowing their arse from their elbow. 2. Their editor/writers"trying to spice it up a little". 3. The speakers making bloody mistake after mistake when reading from a teleprompter in the most important stuff. 4. Other media picking it up and adding their own spin. It's like "Chinese whisper". I can't count the number of times my partner tells me when I come home "have you heard, there is this horribly stupid law that is coming into effect next month". Then I check, and it's not a law, but a proposal, it hasn't been even accepted to be discussed yet and the details are completely different too. I understand, not many smart people these days go into "traditional news reporting". It's a pity, because good news reporting is a prerequisite of a well functioning democratic society It will only get worse, as revenue from traditional news drops they'll be more and more dssperate to make money the only way they can, by increasing the emotional load of the stuff they report. Everything has to be extreme, outraging, horrible etc.

quesera 3y ago
> I can't count the number of times my partner tells me when I come home "have you heard, there is this horribly stupid law that is coming into effect next month". Then I check, and it's not a law, but a proposal, it hasn't been even accepted to be discussed yet and the details are completely different too. It's certainly not the only source of error, but I find that the answer to my first question ("What, where did you read about that?") is almost always "Facebook". It's become a running joke in my household. It turns out though that some people read news as entertainment, and don't really care if it's particularly true. This is probably fine, but it breaks down when the evoked response is outrage instead of a laugh.

piloto_ciego 3y ago

Arguably there are epistemological reasons why this has always been the case; we don’t know much of anything - we’re limited in time and space. Acceptance of this and trying to use your best judgement is the key here. Just do your best.