I found this post insightful and interesting. I especially appreciate the various quotes and links to further sources. I don't have much to contribute to the di

I found this post insightful and interesting. I especially appreciate the various quotes and links to further sources. I don't have much to contribute to the discussion, but this penultimate paragraph brought up an idea: >This principle can also apply when private incentives exist but are asymmetric. A pro-Ukraine propagandist can probably make a bit of money, but not as much as a pro-Russian one, because Russia has a lot more money. And debunking propaganda makes little money at all. So the Kremlin’s lies have a natural advantage here. This seems correct on the face, but leaves out the substantial effects that platforms have by putting their thumbs on the scales. Pro-Ukraine videos perform better on YouTube and Twitter than do Pro-Russian ones. I believe this is because the platforms are explicitly down-ranking pro-Russian propaganda. This is likely being done in the name of combatting misinformation. One thing that is abundantly clear though - in war, both sides are strongly incentivized to lie. For example, you will essentially never hear a true casualty number about a war that's in progress from either side. I follow a number of pro-Ukraine commentators who conveniently leave out the rare occasions that Russia has a military victory, but confidently repeat each Ukrainian success as if it were the tipping point of the war. Is this misinformation? It is certainly selected and communicated with a strong slant.