3 ms·

This is twitter - that's like asking people to have a higher editorial standard on SMS messages to their friends.

idle7 18y ago
well - how about stop sending messages if you can't trust the information you are spreading? that's what i meant by editorial standards. so yes, it's censorship of sorts, but it's more like self-censorship - or self-restraint to be more exact.
- Tichy 18y ago
  Twitter users are still capable of using google. So if somebody tweets about a pandemic, the next reactions of twitter users would probably be to google it. I don't think they are stupid sheep who just do whatever their twitter-friends tell them. It is still useful information to hear that worries about a pandemic have arisen, no matter if the advice for actions is right or wrong.
  - idle7 18y ago
    well, as we've seen, many people were re-tweeting false advice ("don't eat pork") without bothering to check anything on google...
    - Tichy 18y ago
      Ah, I didn't even notice that some people seem to think it is transmitted via eating pork. But did they get retweeted a lot? Still not convinced that it is worse than email, for example - like those meme-viri that keep spreading via email.
    - nopassrecover 18y ago
      Why should they bother? Why take this more personally than when people spread false information through other means?
- nopassrecover 18y ago
  Official people should show self-restraint because they are sources of authority. The impression I got from the article is that the author thinks Twitter users are sources of authority and that therefore some means of self-restraint or censorship is required. There's a difference between proclaiming you a source of authority (e.g. the WHO) and people labeling you a source of authority (e.g. Twitter users).
- silentbicycle 18y ago
  Twitter, as a medium, is defined by sending short messages, with neither time for second thoughts nor space for citations. Whether it's intentional or just an emergent property of its design, it's heavily skewed towards rewarding hysterical sound bites. (The above characteristics are shared by SMS, of course.)

idle7 18y ago

well - how about stop sending messages if you can't trust the information you are spreading? that's what i meant by editorial standards. so yes, it's censorship of sorts, but it's more like self-censorship - or self-restraint to be more exact.

Tichy 18y ago
Twitter users are still capable of using google. So if somebody tweets about a pandemic, the next reactions of twitter users would probably be to google it. I don't think they are stupid sheep who just do whatever their twitter-friends tell them. It is still useful information to hear that worries about a pandemic have arisen, no matter if the advice for actions is right or wrong.
- idle7 18y ago
  well, as we've seen, many people were re-tweeting false advice ("don't eat pork") without bothering to check anything on google...
  - Tichy 18y ago
    Ah, I didn't even notice that some people seem to think it is transmitted via eating pork. But did they get retweeted a lot? Still not convinced that it is worse than email, for example - like those meme-viri that keep spreading via email.
  - nopassrecover 18y ago
    Why should they bother? Why take this more personally than when people spread false information through other means?
nopassrecover 18y ago
Official people should show self-restraint because they are sources of authority. The impression I got from the article is that the author thinks Twitter users are sources of authority and that therefore some means of self-restraint or censorship is required. There's a difference between proclaiming you a source of authority (e.g. the WHO) and people labeling you a source of authority (e.g. Twitter users).
silentbicycle 18y ago
Twitter, as a medium, is defined by sending short messages, with neither time for second thoughts nor space for citations. Whether it's intentional or just an emergent property of its design, it's heavily skewed towards rewarding hysterical sound bites. (The above characteristics are shared by SMS, of course.)