4 ms·

Virality is not an indicator of accuracy or authority. Do you dispute this?

• zmgsabst 2y ago
  I don’t understand your comment. Are you claiming that the video is fake? — if not, what’s your comment referring to with “accuracy”? — how is “authority” relevant at all, when discussing video of a malfunction?
  • h0l0cube 2y ago
    Provably digitally altered fake videos of voter fraud were made and disseminated by Russia during the US 2020 election. Non-partisan institutions put a lot of energy in trying to debunk these operations which basically suit America's adversaries and, absent of critical thinking, many people become unwitting participants in their disinformation campaigns. By eating away at the trust of non-partisan institutions that are established to maintain free and fair elections, autocracies like Russia, Iran, China, etc., move up in the world at the expense of internal divisions in the US.
    • wannacboatmovie 2y ago
      You're comparing apples and oranges in an attempt to distract from the topic by invoking the Russian disinformation trope. The video is provably authentic, and it elicited an official response from the local government. End of story. By your logic, if it appears on social media at all, it never happened.
      • h0l0cube 2y ago
        No, I’m explaining the need for critical thinking, not that all stories of voter fraud/manipulation are immediately bunk. The default of credulity is much more troublesome as it allows for misinformation to be promulgated and be given unearned credence - it gives adversarial actors ‘authority’ one might say. It’s also important to note that in terms of actual fraud, audits and challenges from 2020 show that the system works, contrary to widespread public outrage on the issue
  • loteck 2y ago
    There's nothing about my question to misunderstand. Are you troubled at the prospect of answering it?