This is not new,

studies have shown this for a while.

The old line attributed to Mark Twain;
“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth is even out the door” (or something like that).
has been amplified to the nth degree by Twitter.

My hope is that the next generations will acquire an understanding of this effect and quit believing everything they hear or read.

But the fact that Mark Twain said this over 100 years ago and we’re still today infested with addicts of fake news (in all its various forms) offers scant grounds for optimism.

1 Like

IMO, we will adapt as humans.
I have had this discussion with my kids.
Right now our brains aren’t capable of processing as much information as comes at us all the time, so we filter out certain things. Along with the fact that the algorithms on social media point us in certain directions, we don’t have the wherewithal to double check all the info thrown at us.
I suspect it was similar (on a much smaller scale) when the printing press first came out, radio, etc.

I saw something the other day with a rating of countries by how much people fall for misinformation. Supposedly Finland was best as they have media training in schools. The US was middling if I recall correctly.

If we tried to add media misinformation to the skills kids learn in school, the people who benefit from it would be screaming indoctrination.

Your bias is showing.

We see this already. People claim, almost always without evidence, that factcheckers are all biased and should be ignored. They want to be able to just spew bullshit with immunity.

A couple of things;

  1. It isn’t just one side that disputes “factcheckers”
    Science | AAAS
  2. The “factchecker” cited in the link I provided has a shady past
    Poynter Institute's Retracted List of Fake News Sites Was Written by SPLC Podcast Producer

You mean like;
Border patrol agents “whipping”
Hands up don’t shoot
Covington Catholic

Need I go on?


You see factcheckers claiming those things?

No, but they aren’t flagging them either.
Remember when the Hunter Biden laptop story was flagged as “Russian Misinformation”.

Why wasn’t this “fact checked” and labeled?

Perfect example.

I actually saw the original tweet that Cruz retweeted.
I then took about 20 seconds and pulled up the Atlantic’s website and couldn’t find the story so knew it was fake.

Why couldn’t Cruz do that? Isn’t he in a position of a bit more responsibility than you?

I don’t know, why couldn’t Mayorkis pay attention to his emails?
Why doesn’t Harris know legal terms?

This list goes on forever, but the party never ends.

1 Like

Ironically I did too

You here about the murder that happened in your state but you don’t generally hear about genocide

You hear about the 7 yo who dies from COVID but not the thousands of 75 year olds who have

When something is common, it’s not sensational. The news amplifies what’s rare. Plane lands safely isn’t the attention grabber that plane crash is. Shark victim is rare but it might make national news. School shootings tend to be on the news especially if they’re in wealthy suburban districts. So if you hear about something on the news, it probably is something relatively rare. People dying from falls, overdoses, heart disease, cancer, or choking doesn’t tend to make the news

Much of the screaming would be from the networks as their media would be subject to that training…

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.