Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday January 16 2022, @10:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the By-the-inch,-it's-a-cinch-but-a-mile-takes-a-while dept.

We've previously discussed ( https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=21/12/11/1847236 ) how it becomes impossible to reverse the polarization of a community once their differences become too great, and how that plays out both here at SN and in the wider world. Science Blog has a piece ( https://scienceblog.com/527745/computer-model-seeks-to-explain-the-spread-of-misinformation-and-suggest-counter-measures/ ) about a PLOS paper titled "Cognitive cascades: How to model (and potentially counter) the spread of fake news" ( https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0261811 ) which uses an interesting computer model to explore how this actually happens.

The model demonstrated that if the new information is too much at odds with a person's existing belief, it will be ignored. Furthermore, if that belief is connected with the person's identity, their current belief will be strengthened as a defense against cognitive dissonance. Interestingly, though, a succession of new information that gradually nudge the person to adjust their beliefs can, over time, cause the person to adopt a belief that is very different from the one they started with. This sounds like how psy-ops manipulate targets to accept extreme views.

What was the gradual change of ideas that have led national political parties to be ever more different from one another, and who fed them those messages?


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This discussion has been archived.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: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 16 2022, @12:30PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 16 2022, @12:30PM (#1213105)

    The problem is that you will not check the sources even if you want to.
    I was looking at most of news in my country's outlets and NEVER seen the information about source. Really. Even when it is about the recently published law act - there is a national site in which you can see new law acts published, there are no links to it. The only links are advertisements and they are paid links.
    So news outlets got what they wanted: they don't point to the sources, so they got misinformation. Sorry, that's how it works, you asked for it.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1, Troll) by khallow on Sunday January 16 2022, @05:51PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 16 2022, @05:51PM (#1213173) Journal

    The problem is that you will not check the sources even if you want to.

    Sounds like a pulled out of your ass problem. Maybe you need to find a better class of problem?

    When the reader gets blamed first thing for some perceived fault from a position of complete ignorance of the reader's context, I look elsewhere for the actual problem.

    I was looking at most of news in my country's outlets and NEVER seen the information about source. Really. Even when it is about the recently published law act - there is a national site in which you can see new law acts published, there are no links to it.

    Then sounds like you're looking in the wrong places. Look elsewhere. We really do have this figured out, seriously. News isn't some scientific journal. They routinely don't link to sources. You have to do the work yourself. So do the work yourself.