4 ms·

I would actually love if what comes out of this is that people stop trusting social media entirely and put a lot more weight into face-to-face interactions.

by tyleo 1y ago

frollogaston 1y ago
That and low-effort journalism or ads. Without AI, writing tons of bs is already a well-established skill, now it doesn't even take skill.
alganet 1y ago
That doesn't solve the problem. The person you are talking to face-to-face could have been targeted with disinformation as well. This is suggested in the paper: manufacture of narrative across communities. Those communities are not exclusively online.
Loughla 1y ago
Legitimately though, when did we shift from 'don't believe anything on the Internet' to 'believe everything on the Internet'? When and why did that happen?
- const_cast 1y ago
  When people discovered that telling people what they want to hear makes them money. My favorite example of this is the entire sphere of anti-science "health" stuff on TikTok. Seeds oils bad, steak good, raw milk good, chemo bad. I noticed something. Every single time, without fail, this person is trying to sell me something. Sometimes it's outright linked in the TikTok, sometimes it's in their bio. But they're always salespeople. Salespeople lie guys. They want you to buy their stuff, of course they're going to tell you their stuff works.
  - QuantumGood 1y ago
    Believing business, politicians or media if it sounds good has long been a big problem.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      It's significantly worse with the advent of the internet. Because ultimately anyone can say anything. Say what you will about media and the government, but they at least vet their stuff. They're not gonna tell you the Earth is flat.
      - QuantumGood 1y ago
        Not in Benjamin Franklin's time. Look up what politicians said of the media in that era.
- kristjansson 1y ago
  General inability to distinguish the form of content from its veracity? The same people that assailed the internet in the 90s probably bought tabloids at the supermarket checkout. Newsweek, News of the World, who can tell the difference?
  - reaperducer 1y ago
    Newsweek, News of the World, who can tell the difference? When I was in elementary school, we had seemingly endless drills to help us differentiate between fact and opinion, truth and snake oil. Like civics, geography, and the other basics of society, it's no longer taught.
- reaperducer 1y ago
  when did we shift from 'don't believe anything on the Internet' to 'believe everything on the Internet'? It's largely generational. Boomers and X's were there when the internet debuted and were exposed to lots of "Beware of the scary internet" stories in the legitimate media. The internet was already normal and common when Millennials and Z's came along, so they didn't get the same warnings. The notion that grandma falls for online scams more often than a Z is an ageist trope that has been disproven in several studies.
  - Loughla 1y ago
    It's not about scams though. It's about bullshit news stories. My anecdotal evidence says older folks are far more likely to buy a bullshit "news" story. Also do you have any links to those studies? I would genuinely like to see them.
    - ASalazarMX 1y ago
      I think your parent comment was referring to studies about scams rather than bullshit and propaganda. I don't recall any studies specifically measuring non-financial gullibility. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/data-visualizations/data-spotlight/2022/12/who-experiences-scams-story-all-ages https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/data-visualizations/data-spo... https://time.com/6802011/gen-z-financial-scams-fraud/ https://time.com/6802011/gen-z-financial-scams-fraud/
- bigyabai 1y ago
  Perception plays an underappreciated role in shaping reality. If people want to believe in happy lies or overblown outrage, they will do that with or without the internet to guide them.

I would actually love if what comes out of this is that people stop trusting social media entirely and put a lot more weight into face-to-face interactions.

by tyleo 1y ago

I would actually love if what comes out of this is that people stop trusting social media entirely and put a lot more weight into face-to-face interactions.

frollogaston 1y ago

That and low-effort journalism or ads. Without AI, writing tons of bs is already a well-established skill, now it doesn't even take skill.

alganet 1y ago

That doesn't solve the problem. The person you are talking to face-to-face could have been targeted with disinformation as well. This is suggested in the paper: manufacture of narrative across communities. Those communities are not exclusively online.

Loughla 1y ago

Legitimately though, when did we shift from 'don't believe anything on the Internet' to 'believe everything on the Internet'? When and why did that happen?

const_cast 1y ago
When people discovered that telling people what they want to hear makes them money. My favorite example of this is the entire sphere of anti-science "health" stuff on TikTok. Seeds oils bad, steak good, raw milk good, chemo bad. I noticed something. Every single time, without fail, this person is trying to sell me something. Sometimes it's outright linked in the TikTok, sometimes it's in their bio. But they're always salespeople. Salespeople lie guys. They want you to buy their stuff, of course they're going to tell you their stuff works.
- QuantumGood 1y ago
  Believing business, politicians or media if it sounds good has long been a big problem.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    It's significantly worse with the advent of the internet. Because ultimately anyone can say anything. Say what you will about media and the government, but they at least vet their stuff. They're not gonna tell you the Earth is flat.
    - QuantumGood 1y ago
      Not in Benjamin Franklin's time. Look up what politicians said of the media in that era.
kristjansson 1y ago
General inability to distinguish the form of content from its veracity? The same people that assailed the internet in the 90s probably bought tabloids at the supermarket checkout. Newsweek, News of the World, who can tell the difference?
- reaperducer 1y ago
  Newsweek, News of the World, who can tell the difference? When I was in elementary school, we had seemingly endless drills to help us differentiate between fact and opinion, truth and snake oil. Like civics, geography, and the other basics of society, it's no longer taught.
reaperducer 1y ago
when did we shift from 'don't believe anything on the Internet' to 'believe everything on the Internet'? It's largely generational. Boomers and X's were there when the internet debuted and were exposed to lots of "Beware of the scary internet" stories in the legitimate media. The internet was already normal and common when Millennials and Z's came along, so they didn't get the same warnings. The notion that grandma falls for online scams more often than a Z is an ageist trope that has been disproven in several studies.
- Loughla 1y ago
  It's not about scams though. It's about bullshit news stories. My anecdotal evidence says older folks are far more likely to buy a bullshit "news" story. Also do you have any links to those studies? I would genuinely like to see them.
  - ASalazarMX 1y ago
    I think your parent comment was referring to studies about scams rather than bullshit and propaganda. I don't recall any studies specifically measuring non-financial gullibility. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/data-visualizations/data-spotlight/2022/12/who-experiences-scams-story-all-ages https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/data-visualizations/data-spo... https://time.com/6802011/gen-z-financial-scams-fraud/ https://time.com/6802011/gen-z-financial-scams-fraud/
bigyabai 1y ago
Perception plays an underappreciated role in shaping reality. If people want to believe in happy lies or overblown outrage, they will do that with or without the internet to guide them.