4 ms·

The term "misinformation" is editorial bias, unfit for an encyclopedia. As is "conspiracy theory". And yet you'll note the two biggest murderers in history have

The term "misinformation" is editorial bias, unfit for an encyclopedia. As is "conspiracy theory". And yet you'll note the two biggest murderers in history have no such annotations tacked on to their views.

rootusrootus 3y ago
Each of the others has decades to draw from when creating a summary. What else is RFK Jr known for if not for his anti-vaccine views? It seems pretty accurate to make that a major part of any summary about him. Otherwise the only notable thing is that he's a Kennedy. Is there any term more accurate than 'misinformation' for what he says? When a claim is not even slightly supported with hard evidence, and is in fact heavily contradicted, it's fair to label it for what it is.
- explaininjs 3y ago
  His claims have been supported with hard evidence. But it’s hard evidence that people don’t like, so they ignore it or throw “-ism” exceptions [1] at it and pretend that precludes them from critically thought. [2]. You can see how an example of how much the media loves apply that “misinformation” word you keep using to people who refer to officially peer reviewed government sponsored research that doesn’t align with the narrative they want to push here [2]. I expect that level of bias from the media, encyclopedias should be tasked to rise above it. The report to which he refers is here [3], published by the NIH. And spoke. about here [4] 1. http://paulgraham.com/heresy.html http://paulgraham.com/heresy.html 2. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rfk-jr-accused-making-antisemitic-racist-claims-covid/story?id=101323851 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rfk-jr-accused-making-antise... 3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32664879/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32664879/ 4. https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1680227322509635595 https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/16802273225096355...
nateglims 3y ago
Is that editorial bias if it’s the consensus of experts? Isn’t that what an encyclopedia is even if it produces its own sort of bias?
- explaininjs 3y ago
  Many experts agree with him. But you wouldn’t know it from his encyclopedia entry. Don’t you think that’s an issue?

rootusrootus 3y ago

Each of the others has decades to draw from when creating a summary. What else is RFK Jr known for if not for his anti-vaccine views? It seems pretty accurate to make that a major part of any summary about him. Otherwise the only notable thing is that he's a Kennedy. Is there any term more accurate than 'misinformation' for what he says? When a claim is not even slightly supported with hard evidence, and is in fact heavily contradicted, it's fair to label it for what it is.

explaininjs 3y ago
His claims have been supported with hard evidence. But it’s hard evidence that people don’t like, so they ignore it or throw “-ism” exceptions [1] at it and pretend that precludes them from critically thought. [2]. You can see how an example of how much the media loves apply that “misinformation” word you keep using to people who refer to officially peer reviewed government sponsored research that doesn’t align with the narrative they want to push here [2]. I expect that level of bias from the media, encyclopedias should be tasked to rise above it. The report to which he refers is here [3], published by the NIH. And spoke. about here [4] 1. http://paulgraham.com/heresy.html http://paulgraham.com/heresy.html 2. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rfk-jr-accused-making-antisemitic-racist-claims-covid/story?id=101323851 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rfk-jr-accused-making-antise... 3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32664879/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32664879/ 4. https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1680227322509635595 https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/16802273225096355...

nateglims 3y ago

Is that editorial bias if it’s the consensus of experts? Isn’t that what an encyclopedia is even if it produces its own sort of bias?

explaininjs 3y ago
Many experts agree with him. But you wouldn’t know it from his encyclopedia entry. Don’t you think that’s an issue?