Reply
Esteemed Social Butterfly

Who Gets To Determine What Is Misinformation

"Who gets to determine what’s “misinformation” and what’s not?

 

As social media companies, under pressure, move in a direction of imposing stricter rules about permissible content on their platforms, this is the question users should be asking.

 

Earlier this month, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki said the video giant would be removing videos that go against World Health Organization recommendations on COVID-19.

 

Referring to “removing information that is problematic” and “anything that is medically unsubstantiated,” Wojcicki specifically called out certain suggestions of vitamins or other nutritional supplements as a treatment.

 

Who gets to determine what’s “misinformation” and what’s not?

As social media companies, under pressure, move in a direction of imposing stricter rules about permissible content on their platforms, this is the question users should be asking.

 

Earlier this month, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki said the video giant would be removing videos that go against World Health Organization recommendations on COVID-19.

 

Referring to “removing information that is problematic” and “anything that is medically unsubstantiated,” Wojcicki specifically called out certain suggestions of vitamins or other nutritional supplements as a treatment."

 

<snip>

 

"The more vetting power social media companies give—particularly if given to one organization or a small group of organizations—the greater the potential there is for “inconvenient facts” to be quashed.

 

Yes, misinformation can be dangerous. But misinformation is far from the only threat. As social media companies balance priorities, they’d be wise to remember that what many love best about the internet is having a free, open exchange of information and views—not being in a carefully sealed bubble. 

 

Sometimes, the wisdom of the masses truly does trump the wisdom of the so-called experts."

 

More at: https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/28/misinformation-isnt-the-only-danger/

Honored Social Butterfly

I find it interesting that only the regressives need to have a definition of the term "misinformation". It does tell you something. 

Honored Social Butterfly

GOPerBots will swallow whatever the GOPerLords feed them, claiming that Fox would not be "#1" if they weren't truthful. See, the Bots don't even know FoxNews is watched by about 14% of the daily audience for the actual News services on ABC (8.56Million nightly viewers), NBC (7.90Million) and CBS (5.82Million) compared to the 2.5 Million lofos watching Fox lie to them on the various shows they officially call "entertainment" to avoid law suits for slander.

 

Fox gets its viewers ON CABLE, where it's daily viewership of 2.5Million lags behind the two actual news networks who have a total of 3.1Million viewers (1.6M on MSNBC AND 1.5M CNN).

 

This is only possible because Reagan vetoed the legislation intended to enshrine the FCC policy called The Fairness Doctrine into law. Had a few GOPers broken ranks to override that veto, there would be no Fox News because they could never keep a broadcast license.

0 Kudos
2,003 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

"I don't know where that came from who said it  I don't remember ..someone said it....but  maybe it will happen or  won't happen...we'll  wait and  see "  

That is T RUMP's stock answer  when he's questioned about misinformation he's given out …..

 

Mostly he   rambles along   in broken up sentences so you don't know what the heck he's really saying...it's  

DOUBLETALK.      

Silver Conversationalist

Free and open discussion does not include the ability to post and circulate that which is false. Since Reagan made lies and slander acceptable on the Public's electromagnetic spectrum, Fox and H8Radio have pandered to a segment of society that prefers "comfortable lies" to "inconvenient Truths", and what had been chased under the rocks by public opinion because a cottage industry of deceit, culminating in Putin electing a Psychopathic moron as his ToadPOTUS.

 

Only solution is to undo the disaster that Reagan unleashed and legislate a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would require the Republican Propaganda Ministry to provide equal time to anyone or anything they speak against, and by "equal" I mean same time slot and same duration. We also need to get back to the "Investigative Reporting" that kept us safe and informed for generations. Remember the CBS expose' on the disgusting practices of the grocery chain that took "expired" (past sell by date) meat, dip it in bleach, and return it to the shelves? Republican judges decided that was no longer allowed, and exposing profitable crime was now going to be illegal.

 

Won't get rid of the weirdo conspiracy theory clan, but should chase them back under the rocks were they belong,

Social Butterfly

I can see why you have a problem identifying who determines what is misinformation.

 

People who RESEARCH the information are qualified to comment on its veracity. Research is anathema to Trumpettes so there's no way you could have known.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honored Social Butterfly

Here is a good rule of thumb. If there are documented facts out there that directly contradict your statements, it is misinformation. Such as:

 

  • Trump suggested light and disinfectant could be used to treat coronavirus patients
  • Trump repeatedly hyped an unproven drug to treat coronavirus patients
  • Trump suggested social distancing measures could be worse than the coronavirus itself
  • Trump stated the virus could go away when the weather warms up
  • Trump downplayed the severity of the coronavirus, comparing it with the flu
  • Trump, deflecting criticism that his own handling of the crisis left the United States unprepared, accused the W.H.O. of mismanaging it,

That would be the definition and a bunch of examples of misinformation. 

Honored Social Butterfly

We should all be going to primary sources to verify claims that we read, regardless of platform. That’s how to tell what’s incorrect information or not. Over time you’ll see which sources are generally reliable and which ones aren’t. 

Social media companies are businesses. They can do as please. There are plenty of crackpot and homeopathic websites out there to get wrong information from. 

Honored Social Butterfly

Who Gets To Determine What Is Misinformation

=========================================

The networks...your pick ....and do not give me the garbage that its just the right wing like we have posters saying ....in doing so they show they are narrow minded and are ill informed.
0 Kudos
2,063 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Kidboy: The networks...your pick ....and do not give me the garbage that its just the right wing like we have posters saying ....in doing so they show they are narrow minded and are ill informed.

 

See THIS is what would be considered "misinformation". A statement.  No documentation. No examples. No nuance.  Pure fiction. 

Honored Social Butterfly

Have you seen the crap that right-wing media source put out?  Those like, "Patriot Pulse", "Renewed Right", etc.  Ever since the creation of the Tea Party, Conservatives have put out these completely bogus information sources.  Does the Right care?  Or are fictitious "Alternative Facts" acceptable?  I remember when John McCane corrected, on National TV, a supporter that was spewing nonsense, that she heard Obama was a terrorist.  The right criticized McCain.....they clearly preferred lies and falsehoods over facts, truth and being a warm human....


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Honored Social Butterfly

The Teabaggers thrive on CT and comfortable lies - the lies that agree with their preconceived notions and support their bigotry = like having their ToadPOTUS call them "Good People", giving them the courage to drive their cars over their peaceful opponents.

Honored Social Butterfly

On a personal level, trust your instincts combined with knowledge and research. 
I think in most cases, if it seems wrong or out of bounds, it probably is. 
Always trust what you see, hear, and read...and not when someone states otherwise. 
And if you believe in the truth, it’s hard for someone to lie to you...but, if you do not question lies or misinformation, then you may easily be influenced by dishonesty and deception...we all have personal choices to make. 

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png