4 ms·
The fact that reports on "misinformation" don't look at the denominator when considering the volume of impressions is a great example of selectively reporting s
by arrozconcosas 3y ago
The fact that reports on "misinformation" don't look at the denominator when considering the volume of impressions is a great example of selectively reporting statistics to support a preconceived notion.
- sneak 3y agoThe videos they find also show view counts. This allows them to estimate (very roughly!) the view counts across all videos, because it allows them to see the distribution.
- im3w1l 3y agoThe issue with that is if there is one or a handful of videos that have a significant portion of all youtube views. Most likely they will not be in your sample which could lead to a big underestimate.
- junofan 3y agoNot to mention bot farms. The most-viewed source of “misinformation” in the linked 2020 report simply… doesn’t exist anymore. Have we just been hearing about crappy sites buying views these past few years?
- senderista 3y agoIt should be obvious, but "misinformation" is an arbitrary political designation and therefore a constantly moving target. "You should wear an N95 mask to avoid getting COVID" was misinformation in March 2020 but not 3 months later. "Vaccines may not prevent COVID transmission" was misinformation from 2020 until sometime in 2022. "COVID infection may confer significant immunity from future infection" was misinformation for about the same period. The "lab leak hypothesis" was a "racist conspiracy theory" from 2020 until 2023, when it was officially endorsed by YouTube's political sponsors. And so on.
- ta8645 3y ago[flagged]
- jayrot 3y agoThe obvious rebuttal is that when people talk about “misinformation” colloquially, they’re talking about _deliberate_ misinformation.
- senderista 3y agoThat is absolutely not how it's been colloquially used for the past few years at least. It's become the equivalent of "extremism" in Russia.