2 ms·

Yeah, exactly. Maybe before 2020 I would say Wikipedia is the gold standard (meaning those were my political views/biases, not that I think it got worse after 2

by alex1138 10mo ago

Yeah, exactly. Maybe before 2020 I would say Wikipedia is the gold standard (meaning those were my political views/biases, not that I think it got worse after 2020 although it probably did) but I've seen too much in the last few years to trust anything approximating mainstream notions of "misinformation". There's official narrative being enforced

greggoB 10mo ago
> but I've seen too much in the last few years Can you share at least your top 3 examples? Claims of an "official narrative" frankly just sound kookie when made without a shred to back them up.
- mmooss 10mo ago
  Maybe before November 2024. Now MAGA supporters control CBS News, Fox, and others; and ABC News, the Washington Post, etc. openly comply with their demands.
- alex1138 10mo ago
  Literally everything to do with covid. I can list "at least 3" right there. Masks don't work, the vaccine has killed people, epidemiologists (credible ones) warned against lockdowns. Wikipedia will tell you otherwise I'm sure There's other things as well I could probably think of but when you have politically motivated actors going on edit wars and the fact Wiki may even be controlled by the intelligence agencies we have a problem (And why does Youtube put Wikipedia entries as official truth under certain videos?)
  - greggoB 10mo ago
    > Literally everything to do with covid. I can list "at least 3" right there So what I'm actually asking for is credible references/citations to back up your claims - otherwise they're at best just your opinions, or at worst you spreading conspiracy theories. > the fact Wiki may even be controlled by the intelligence agencies we have a problem Seems conspiracy theories it is. From experience, I know it is highly unlikely that I or anyone else is going to pull you away from your convictions, so I won't even bother. What I will say is you're also unlikely to find a receptive audience to such views on HN, especially if you're not even going to try substantiating them.
biophysboy 10mo ago
Social media is much more feelings driven than mainstream media. They are basically tertiary sources, 2+ steps removed from actual source material.
jibal 10mo ago
> There's official narrative being enforced There's no such thing and it's not happening. WP mechanisms don't even allow for "official narratives" to be "enforced". > Literally everything to do with covid. I can list "at least 3" right there. Masks don't work, the vaccine has killed people, epidemiologists (credible ones) warned against lockdowns. Wikipedia will tell you otherwise I'm sure You were asked for examples, not antivax talking points, or things that you're "sure" of without a shred of evidence. Wikipedia tells the truth--which includes the data on the efficacy of masks and the ratios between people dying from vaccines and people dying from the diseases those vaccines mitigate. And the credibility of epidemiologists is not measured by which ones some ideologue agrees with--but Wikipedia covers a broad range of statements made by epidemiologists. And the fact that Wikipedia articles say things that some ideologue disagrees with does not entail that an "official narrative" is being enforced. P.S. The response displays the complete lack of intellectual integrity that was already evident.
- alex1138 10mo ago
  [flagged]

greggoB 10mo ago

> but I've seen too much in the last few years Can you share at least your top 3 examples? Claims of an "official narrative" frankly just sound kookie when made without a shred to back them up.

mmooss 10mo ago
Maybe before November 2024. Now MAGA supporters control CBS News, Fox, and others; and ABC News, the Washington Post, etc. openly comply with their demands.
alex1138 10mo ago
Literally everything to do with covid. I can list "at least 3" right there. Masks don't work, the vaccine has killed people, epidemiologists (credible ones) warned against lockdowns. Wikipedia will tell you otherwise I'm sure There's other things as well I could probably think of but when you have politically motivated actors going on edit wars and the fact Wiki may even be controlled by the intelligence agencies we have a problem (And why does Youtube put Wikipedia entries as official truth under certain videos?)
- greggoB 10mo ago
  > Literally everything to do with covid. I can list "at least 3" right there So what I'm actually asking for is credible references/citations to back up your claims - otherwise they're at best just your opinions, or at worst you spreading conspiracy theories. > the fact Wiki may even be controlled by the intelligence agencies we have a problem Seems conspiracy theories it is. From experience, I know it is highly unlikely that I or anyone else is going to pull you away from your convictions, so I won't even bother. What I will say is you're also unlikely to find a receptive audience to such views on HN, especially if you're not even going to try substantiating them.

biophysboy 10mo ago

Social media is much more feelings driven than mainstream media. They are basically tertiary sources, 2+ steps removed from actual source material.

jibal 10mo ago

> There's official narrative being enforced There's no such thing and it's not happening. WP mechanisms don't even allow for "official narratives" to be "enforced". > Literally everything to do with covid. I can list "at least 3" right there. Masks don't work, the vaccine has killed people, epidemiologists (credible ones) warned against lockdowns. Wikipedia will tell you otherwise I'm sure You were asked for examples, not antivax talking points, or things that you're "sure" of without a shred of evidence. Wikipedia tells the truth--which includes the data on the efficacy of masks and the ratios between people dying from vaccines and people dying from the diseases those vaccines mitigate. And the credibility of epidemiologists is not measured by which ones some ideologue agrees with--but Wikipedia covers a broad range of statements made by epidemiologists. And the fact that Wikipedia articles say things that some ideologue disagrees with does not entail that an "official narrative" is being enforced. P.S. The response displays the complete lack of intellectual integrity that was already evident.

alex1138 10mo ago
[flagged]