SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
posted by
FatPhil
on Monday February 06 2017, @09:17PM
from the is-there-an-all-fake-news-sites-are-liars-paradox dept.
from the is-there-an-all-fake-news-sites-are-liars-paradox dept.
Over the last few months, we've talked about the weird obsession some people upset by the results of the election have had with the concept of "fake news." We warned that focusing on "fake news" as a problem was not just silly and pointless, but that it would quickly morph into calls for censorship. And, even worse, that censorship power would be in the hands of whoever got to define what "fake news" was.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Bad Idea or the Worst Idea? Having the FTC Regulate "Fake News"
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 134 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
We lie loudest when we lie to ourselves.
-- Eric Hoffer
(Score: 3, Informative) by meustrus on Monday February 06 2017, @11:19PM
I'm going to take the "fake news" name literally for a moment. When it first showed up in the news, the problem seemed to be obviously fake sources trying to cash in on advertising revenue by fabricating especially clickbaity controversies. Obviously the "problem" definition has changed somewhat, but what I described is still a real problem. But much like everything else, politicians won't stop distracting us with the story until the real problem goes away.
The real problem is us. Well, maybe not Soylentil us, but the royal "us" that watches garbage like CNN. We take fact-checking for granted. We expect reporters to tell truth but never check that they actually do. We judge the authenticity of a story based on the organization backing it when each story must be judged solely by its own evidence. And until we stop expecting other people to separate truth from fiction for us, we will always be susceptible to those with alternative facts.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday February 06 2017, @11:49PM
Terrible nick, excellent comment.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by meustrus on Tuesday February 07 2017, @08:27PM
I've used this unique 8-character screen name since middle school you insensitive clod!
And thanks!
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 07 2017, @01:18AM
Some problems:
Persuasive techniques are more effective than rational argument.
Nobody has the expertise necessary to judge the quality of evidence in every field.
Appealing to cognitive bias can fool the smart and the dumb.
It costs less effort to misinform, distract, and exhaust people than it does to inform them.