5 ms·

Its both: 1. Platforms have a civic responsibility to not promote disinformation. 2. Citizens have a responsibility to escape their bias and bubbles and rejec

by arel 8y ago

Its both: 1. Platforms have a civic responsibility to not promote disinformation. 2. Citizens have a responsibility to escape their bias and bubbles and reject disinformation. But in the current environment where even basic truth and sources are under attack by yelling 'fake news' where is the foundational truth on which to even arrive at critical thinking? This is the authoritarian's great trick. Critical thinking is hard work and discomforting, its much easier to pick a side and allow yourself to be manipulated. We need critical thinking but more importantly we need to attack the tribalism and polarisation that prevent us even making the journey to critical thinking.

tajen 8y ago
and 3. Public media I mean we’ve been told for 40 years that men can only perform conjugal violence and never be victims, only to discover the media has been hiding exactly half of the stories, being silent over 1/4 husbands who will be beaten across their life (the other figure, 1/3 wives, is well-known). It wasn’t literally a lie because each sentence said by the media was true, but they only presented a biased viewpoint. And that’s why a famous « info » channel has lost 30% viewers since last election: recurrent demonstrated bias. People inform themselves on social media because of an immense lack of trust after all media said Trump was going to cause a nuclear war. 18 months later, still waiting. These « fake news » laws, both in USA and Europe, are only the media trying to keep their monopoly in deciding who gets audience or not. And it’s inimaginably dishonest, but they will be voted, because people are gullible.
azangru 8y ago
> But in the current environment where even basic truth and sources are under attack by yelling 'fake news' where is the foundational truth on which to even arrive at critical thinking? > This is the authoritarian's great trick. Is it an undeniable fact that the current environment is significantly different in people’s attitude towards foundational truths than the previous environments? In truly authoritarian (or totalitarian) countries, there are very few outlets broadcasting what goes there for the foundational truths. People are supposed to believe what is being told them via these outlets, yet many (especially the intellectuals) develop defensive mechanisms and learn to ignore what is presented to them as foundational truths. Take the Soviet Union as an example. There were several state-run newspapers and TV channels translating what went for foundational truths, yet with time many learned to disbelieve what they saw on TV or read in newspapers.

by arel 8y ago

tajen 8y ago

and 3. Public media I mean we’ve been told for 40 years that men can only perform conjugal violence and never be victims, only to discover the media has been hiding exactly half of the stories, being silent over 1/4 husbands who will be beaten across their life (the other figure, 1/3 wives, is well-known). It wasn’t literally a lie because each sentence said by the media was true, but they only presented a biased viewpoint. And that’s why a famous « info » channel has lost 30% viewers since last election: recurrent demonstrated bias. People inform themselves on social media because of an immense lack of trust after all media said Trump was going to cause a nuclear war. 18 months later, still waiting. These « fake news » laws, both in USA and Europe, are only the media trying to keep their monopoly in deciding who gets audience or not. And it’s inimaginably dishonest, but they will be voted, because people are gullible.

azangru 8y ago

> But in the current environment where even basic truth and sources are under attack by yelling 'fake news' where is the foundational truth on which to even arrive at critical thinking? > This is the authoritarian's great trick. Is it an undeniable fact that the current environment is significantly different in people’s attitude towards foundational truths than the previous environments? In truly authoritarian (or totalitarian) countries, there are very few outlets broadcasting what goes there for the foundational truths. People are supposed to believe what is being told them via these outlets, yet many (especially the intellectuals) develop defensive mechanisms and learn to ignore what is presented to them as foundational truths. Take the Soviet Union as an example. There were several state-run newspapers and TV channels translating what went for foundational truths, yet with time many learned to disbelieve what they saw on TV or read in newspapers.