SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Internet Archive Adds "Context" with Warnings
The Internet Archive is warning users about debunked 'zombie' coronavirus misinformation
The Internet Archive is alerting users when they've clicked on some stories that were debunked or taken down on the live web, following reports that people were spreading false coronavirus information through its Wayback Machine.
As NBC reporter Brandy Zadrozny noted on Twitter, the site includes a bright banner on one popular Medium post that was removed as misinformation. Its video archive also creates friction by making users log in to see some videos containing false information, like a reposted version of the conspiracy documentary Plandemic. These videos also include critical comments from Wayback Machine director Mark Graham who described the warnings to Zadrozny as an example of the "importance and value of context in archiving."
What Critical Thinking? Wayback Machine is Now Complicit in Big Tech Censorship
What critical thinking? Wayback Machine is now complicit in Big Tech censorship:
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday May 26 2020, @07:35PM
That's the point. Take everything offline. Then, give everything to organizations that pay for special access. No decisions to be made. No process to be changed.
Don't like the access policy? Can't afford a license? Then go build your own internet archive. The WayBack Machine suppresses competition in archival services by being free. If it weren't, we may even see competing archives, focused on different areas, serving different customer bases.
Then again, there are definitely flaws in my proposal, especially around who loses access. It is basically putting internet archives behind a paywall similar to the academic journal system, so it inherits all of those flaws.
But the motivation gets back to what you said: "Who watches the watchers?" If the unwashed masses really can't be trusted with the raw information, I think it would be better to take it all away from the people that probably don't need it, i.e. those being linked to old propaganda as if it were current credible news, than to water it down for the people that absolutely do, i.e. those studying the old propaganda with the expectation that it speaks to a historical reality.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?