Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday May 28 2018, @02:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the takyon++ dept.

Elon Musk has floated the idea of creating Pravda, a web site that would allow users to rate/review the credibility of media organizations and journalists. Pravda Corp. was formed in Delaware and incorporated in California, according to an October 19, 2017 filing. Jared Birchall, a director at Musk's Boring Company, is President of Pravda Corp., and the addresses are identical:

Musk's idea quickly raised concerns that the reputation of news organizations and reporters could be determined by what could be an easy to manipulate online popular vote.

"Elon's next company: Rate My Professor but for Journalists. What a great idea that won't be gamed immediately in extremely predictable ways," Rene DiResta, who researches computation propaganda and is a policy lead at Data For Democracy, wrote on Twitter.

Siva Vaidhyanathan, a media studies professor at the University of Virginia, told CNN such a service might might make sense if it employed a careful methodology and was overseen by an independent journalism foundation.

"It's not a crackpot idea," he said. "The question is why should Elon Musk be the one running it and how trustworthy would it be if he ran it."

Musk has been criticized a lot lately.

Also at The Verge, New Statesman, and The Washington Post.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Monday May 28 2018, @06:15PM (1 child)

    by jmorris (4844) on Monday May 28 2018, @06:15PM (#685252)

    Yeah, wouldn't generalize such a think and think eth really wouldn't either and is trolling. But I can certainly think of one good perfect "canonical" example. Mark Levin. On the radio he seems to be near a rage stroke about half the time and I can't stand the sound of his voice. So I don't listen much and the Mrs also agrees that she can't stand his voice and changes the station so I often don't get a say in the matter. :) But we watched the premiere of his new FNC show and agree it is a great thing, deemed it DVR worthy after the 2nd episode. The difference? He does a sit down interview with a guest for the whole hour and is calm and rational. So few long form programs on TV (lots online of course) and without the shouting the guy really gets a chance to show he really knows his stuff. Makes one wonder if the shouting is a gimmick and there is simply an audience for it on both sides.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Monday May 28 2018, @06:35PM

    by Arik (4543) on Monday May 28 2018, @06:35PM (#685263) Journal
    It is, and a symptom of some deep changes in culture over time as well.

    A few decades ago, a guy that screeched and raved had a relatively hard time finding an audience. It was perceived as crude and boorish.

    Now, it's perceived as free and unfiltered, and lots of people cynically play that. The stigma on boorish behavior in general seems to have pretty much evaporated, and outrage mobs are not a replacement.

    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?