5 ms·

Twitter no longer serves as a trustful source of information

15 points by rpgbr 3y ago

tommek4077 3y ago
Never did.
guntherhermann 3y ago
I have never thought of Twitter as a trustworthy place to get information from. I find it interesting that people use Twitter as an information crutch (as I gather from this website)
- INTPenis 3y ago
  Yes but seeing as a lot of government agencies put official accounts there, even the POTUS, I assume you can understand that a lot of other people saw it as an official source of information.
  - infecto 3y ago
    Certainly I would still generally trust official accounts of the POTUS or other government agencies. Trust but verify like most things of this nature.
- krona 3y ago
  > I find it interesting that people use Twitter as an information crutch Mostly journalists who can't be bothered (or don't have the wherewithal) to corroborate anything they report.
- saberdancer 3y ago
  Twitter changed their algorithm and the way they promote content. Now if you get verified (pay Musk) - your replies get promoted and get more views and reactions. With effective removal of "old" verification system you have no way to validate whether an account is reliable or not. Everyone can look the same and virality is rewarded. It has become much worse than in the past.
- b0sk 3y ago
  Why not? The previous twitter: Tweets from blue-checked Reuters/AP - 99% True Tweets from blue-checked accounts - maybe true, but verify Tweets from regular accounts - probably untrue, verify Now the blue-check is a big Elon simp, mostly a right-winger and pushing some sort of scam. It's pretty much a 4chan clone
tmaly 3y ago
I think the community notes improve things. But I can say Twitter is a better source than Tiktok for sure. I seem many lies and falsehoods being pushed on younger people on Tiktok.
- infecto 3y ago
  We need more efforts in the schools to investigate information that we consume now that it comes in various formats with incredible volume compared to the past.
  - tmaly 3y ago
    I think the effort would be better spent teaching kids how to think and reason about information. If we keep trying to play whack a mole, we don't really get anywhere.
infecto 3y ago
This is less about being a trustful source of information and just a hit piece slamming X and Elon. Wish he had at least listed the two notorious sources of information. I am sure they were not great but would have been nice to see what they were so I can at least be a judge of how valid that statement is.
- rsynnott 3y ago
  Here's a more informative article about the incident: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/08/israel-hamas-disinfo-musk-twitter-x/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/08/israel-...
chiefalchemist 3y ago
We all know the rules: - Trust reluctantly and always always verify. - Consider the source. X is the medium. It's not the source. - Once you consider the source, follow the money. - If it sounds too good - or too bad - to be true, it probably isn't. - Writing something and publishing it on the internet doesn't make anyone a journalist. There's more depth and breadth to journalism than that. - Each of us has a responsibility to ourselves to be mindful of what we consume. Whether that's consumption for the mind, for the body, or for the soul. Junk food is junk food.
logicalmonster 3y ago
1) Who ever trusted X about anything at any time period either before or after Musk? The very premise seems absurd. 2) The example given in this article, that Musk posted links to allegedly bad news sources and then retracted them once he realized that he made a bad recommendation, should be seen as a positive sign. Musk is human, and like all humans, he makes mistakes. The important thing is that he realized he was wrong and tried to fix it. 3) The lesson taken from this isn't that "Musk is bad" it's that skepticism about all information should reign, regardless of source. It doesn't matter if Obama, Musk, Biden, Trump, Fauci, Gates, Alex Jones, or whoever tells the world some alleged fact. You should verify everything that anybody tells you about anything and trust nobody to be the sole arbiter of truth. 4) I think a good journalist would post more information about the endorsement that Musk gave by posting screenshots or something. I'd like to get a better sense of Musk's judgement by seeing their feed for myself, but this article doesn't give that important information. I think that a big problem with modern journalism is that it treats you as if you're not a big boy that can be trusted to make up his own mind and have to be told what to think rather than being shown the facts and giving you the opportunity to make up your own mind. 5) Speaking of responsible journalism, I'd like to point out that motives do matter. And while you can't read minds, it does seem that a lot of journalists' feelings about Musk are peppered by having their elite blue checkmark statuses ripped away from them and hypothetically being available to everybody. That should be a factor that weighs into anybody's analysis when reading journalists about Musk's activity.
- rsynnott 3y ago
  While I'd agree that stuff on Twitter was never particularly trustworthy, the conversion of the blueticks into a monetisation/paid status thing has certainly made it a bit riskier; Twitter no longer has a clear meaningful form of provenance verification. Is that actually a Reuters tweet, or a 'REuters' tweet with a paid bluetick? Most users will be (and are) fooled by this sort of thing, which was largely impossible under the old regime. On (2), he should perhaps check _before_ promoting anti-Semitic fake news accounts; absurd to make excuses for him here.
  - logicalmonster 3y ago
Ajay-p 3y ago
Putting aside those who post to X/Twitter and Elon Musk, I like the community notes feature and have built a little trust in it.
fabiofzero 3y ago
The amount of Elon stans here is... unsurprising, actually. HackerNews gonna HackerNews.
johnea 3y ago
The twitverse was NEVER a source of trusted informaiton. With millions of users posting billions of posts, how could it be...

15 points by rpgbr 3y ago

Never did.

I have never thought of Twitter as a trustworthy place to get information from. I find it interesting that people use Twitter as an information crutch (as I gather from this website)

INTPenis 3y ago
Yes but seeing as a lot of government agencies put official accounts there, even the POTUS, I assume you can understand that a lot of other people saw it as an official source of information.
- infecto 3y ago
  Certainly I would still generally trust official accounts of the POTUS or other government agencies. Trust but verify like most things of this nature.
krona 3y ago
> I find it interesting that people use Twitter as an information crutch Mostly journalists who can't be bothered (or don't have the wherewithal) to corroborate anything they report.
saberdancer 3y ago
Twitter changed their algorithm and the way they promote content. Now if you get verified (pay Musk) - your replies get promoted and get more views and reactions. With effective removal of "old" verification system you have no way to validate whether an account is reliable or not. Everyone can look the same and virality is rewarded. It has become much worse than in the past.
b0sk 3y ago
Why not? The previous twitter: Tweets from blue-checked Reuters/AP - 99% True Tweets from blue-checked accounts - maybe true, but verify Tweets from regular accounts - probably untrue, verify Now the blue-check is a big Elon simp, mostly a right-winger and pushing some sort of scam. It's pretty much a 4chan clone

tmaly 3y ago

I think the community notes improve things. But I can say Twitter is a better source than Tiktok for sure. I seem many lies and falsehoods being pushed on younger people on Tiktok.

infecto 3y ago
We need more efforts in the schools to investigate information that we consume now that it comes in various formats with incredible volume compared to the past.
- tmaly 3y ago
  I think the effort would be better spent teaching kids how to think and reason about information. If we keep trying to play whack a mole, we don't really get anywhere.

infecto 3y ago

This is less about being a trustful source of information and just a hit piece slamming X and Elon. Wish he had at least listed the two notorious sources of information. I am sure they were not great but would have been nice to see what they were so I can at least be a judge of how valid that statement is.

rsynnott 3y ago
Here's a more informative article about the incident: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/08/israel-hamas-disinfo-musk-twitter-x/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/08/israel-...

chiefalchemist 3y ago

We all know the rules: - Trust reluctantly and always always verify. - Consider the source. X is the medium. It's not the source. - Once you consider the source, follow the money. - If it sounds too good - or too bad - to be true, it probably isn't. - Writing something and publishing it on the internet doesn't make anyone a journalist. There's more depth and breadth to journalism than that. - Each of us has a responsibility to ourselves to be mindful of what we consume. Whether that's consumption for the mind, for the body, or for the soul. Junk food is junk food.

logicalmonster 3y ago

1) Who ever trusted X about anything at any time period either before or after Musk? The very premise seems absurd. 2) The example given in this article, that Musk posted links to allegedly bad news sources and then retracted them once he realized that he made a bad recommendation, should be seen as a positive sign. Musk is human, and like all humans, he makes mistakes. The important thing is that he realized he was wrong and tried to fix it. 3) The lesson taken from this isn't that "Musk is bad" it's that skepticism about all information should reign, regardless of source. It doesn't matter if Obama, Musk, Biden, Trump, Fauci, Gates, Alex Jones, or whoever tells the world some alleged fact. You should verify everything that anybody tells you about anything and trust nobody to be the sole arbiter of truth. 4) I think a good journalist would post more information about the endorsement that Musk gave by posting screenshots or something. I'd like to get a better sense of Musk's judgement by seeing their feed for myself, but this article doesn't give that important information. I think that a big problem with modern journalism is that it treats you as if you're not a big boy that can be trusted to make up his own mind and have to be told what to think rather than being shown the facts and giving you the opportunity to make up your own mind. 5) Speaking of responsible journalism, I'd like to point out that motives do matter. And while you can't read minds, it does seem that a lot of journalists' feelings about Musk are peppered by having their elite blue checkmark statuses ripped away from them and hypothetically being available to everybody. That should be a factor that weighs into anybody's analysis when reading journalists about Musk's activity.

rsynnott 3y ago
While I'd agree that stuff on Twitter was never particularly trustworthy, the conversion of the blueticks into a monetisation/paid status thing has certainly made it a bit riskier; Twitter no longer has a clear meaningful form of provenance verification. Is that actually a Reuters tweet, or a 'REuters' tweet with a paid bluetick? Most users will be (and are) fooled by this sort of thing, which was largely impossible under the old regime. On (2), he should perhaps check _before_ promoting anti-Semitic fake news accounts; absurd to make excuses for him here.
- logicalmonster 3y ago

Ajay-p 3y ago

Putting aside those who post to X/Twitter and Elon Musk, I like the community notes feature and have built a little trust in it.

fabiofzero 3y ago

The amount of Elon stans here is... unsurprising, actually. HackerNews gonna HackerNews.

johnea 3y ago

The twitverse was NEVER a source of trusted informaiton. With millions of users posting billions of posts, how could it be...