RE: Spreading "misinformation" and "conspiracy theories"... This is a phrase I am hearing/reading more often these days.

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

Misinformation exists.

The definition:

"false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive."

All you need is at least one human who knows the truth, then they lie and publish the bunk. It's a fairly simple concept. Not worth getting confused.

Why do you think banning misinformation...

Just the thought of banning misinformation is illogical. Unpreventable. Can't stop someone from publishing misinformation unless you could somehow know in advance they were about to publish misinformation. Should someone step in and stop it from spreading? Absolutely. Especially if it's dangerous. Can actors posing as doctors be seen on television selling cigarettes anymore? No. And that's good. Really good. Because a smoker like myself will tell everyone, don't smoke.

Also, the folks who don't subscribe to the Conspiracy Channel on the internet don't deny the existence of actual conspiracies. What's visibly apparent is an entire market of consumers, and quite a few individuals tapping into that market for profit with content they've created and published. Several are merely creating a distraction for people; no different than any form of entertainment. They're posing as insiders but it's visibly apparent they can't be, since they're busy churning out content daily, never leaving the studio unless they're going to the fridge to get something to drink. They add in all the flashy clickbait, sensationalized headlines; becomes a product and gets sold to an established market.

There's a huge difference between a whistleblower and a whistle blowing charlatan. Huge difference between a tabloid journalist and a journalist. It's getting to the point now where the charlatan and tabloid are taking the lion's share of the attention when it comes to certain topics.

People outside of what could be called the standard conspiracy content market also form their own thoughts and can detect a possible conspiracy taking shape if they feel like it.

For instance, some publishing content for that standard market I mentioned throw up a big red flag and scream about being demonitized or deplatformed. So if you were one who wanted to be in control of what kind of information can be spread and how, one of the easiest ways would be to send a clear message there's no money in it, and no venue. That'll deter several from even getting started. Especially if they can't detect they're being pulled along by a charlatan. The ones screaming there's no money and no platform never stopped making money and were heard loud and clear there was no platform, by using their platforms. So what's really going on here? You decide.

Bet you never thought of that one...



0
0
0.000
7 comments
avatar
(Edited)

Bet you never thought of that one...

Nope I have. As I've said before (maybe not to you, I can't remember) I don't tend to be a fan of absolutes. They exist. They are usually not that common. Not nearly as common as people make them out to be.

Instead I operate on probabilities. Based upon the input I have received and how I have processed it and continue to process it I try to act based upon what seems most likely. I realize it is not a certainty.

I apply this approach to everything you wrote in your reply (good reply by the way). Do I get it wrong? Yes. Hopefully I learn from it.

I've observed people get trapped by absolutes, by generalizations, etc. The trap is treating them as absolutes. If instead they are treated as probabilities then there is always that probability it is something else, some different thing.

As to journalists... true journalists are indeed very rare these days.

I took journalism and know what a journalist is supposed to do. I certainly do not do that. My pieces are most definitely my opinions and littered with my own biases.

I know the techniques and if I was striving to actually be a journalist I'd approach my writing very differently.

Instead the writing is my catharsis. It is my outlet. It is a place to let my mind run free. I am often coming up with things I hadn't considered before as I write down the words. The act of writing frees my mind from the mind worm nagging me but it also often exposes new thoughts to me in the process.

That is primarily why I write. I also strive to learn. I try to be introspective about myself. Though I also observe and try to use reason. That doesn't mean my reason will be better than yours or anyone else. All I can pretty much guarantee is it will be different. It will be uniquely me.


As to charlatans and people with agendas.

I don't trust anyone completely. Not even myself. I change my mind.

I will listen to anyone without being trapped into believing them just because I bothered to listen.

I can hear things that are total B.S. and still recognize potential valuable snippets buried in the crap. There is also the risk of taking in some of the B.S.

Yet I have no problems discarding that when it is pointed out in a way I understand and if I agree it is B.S.

I welcome people like you talking to me. I recognize you disagree with me in some areas. That may influence me depending upon how you present it. I can pretty much guarantee it will. How fast though, that I cannot tell you. Sometimes things need to sit and be thought about.

Some things I likely won't ever agree with you on. I also don't expect you to blindly agree with me. That'd be foolhardy.

Both of us walk a path in life. At times our paths may parallel each other. Ultimately only time will tell if we made the better decisions for ourselves or not.

That is part of the adventure. I find it a little exciting to think about.

It is also why I find Utopian concepts, and Perfect situations as ultimately being very boring.

Without problems to overcome I suspect I'd be quite bored.

I often wonder if that is why so many trivial things are being treated like the end of the world for so many people today. Their life is far better and easier than their ancestors. They are bored. They are looking for things to complain about...

Like pronouns...

0
0
0.000
avatar

I'll openly admit I've been duped by some strange things. And if I told you what they were, someone might come along with 6000 words, 42 images, three Youtube videos and a nice opinion piece about how stupid I am for not being able to accept the truth. It can be a challenge to navigate.

I still like to know what makes people tick though. An observer as well.

Bet you never thought of that one...

That's me being jokey again. I do think it's quite obvious and even humorous an entire business template formed around 'censorship'. A certain personality gets a strike on Youtube, or a video taken down, etc. Their ratings skyrocket the moment they're back. People here are learning even receiving downvotes can be used to their advantage in some circumstances. I know for a fact one massive one in the early days really helped put me on the map. It also gave me an opportunity to ponder then present some ideas I never would have had the event not happened.

The world works in mysterious ways.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yeah I have been lucky and aside from a run in with berniesanders whale on steemit and his horde of accounts I never really had a big down vote issue. In that one case I think he only did it on 2 or 3 of my posts. That was it in over 3 years of posting.

Back then I'd do as many as 4 posts in a day fairly regularly. In fact, I had to put a limit on myself to make me stop at 4. I know there were occasions I still went over that.

That is not so much a problem anymore.

All of my reactions to down voting have been simply me responding to what I am observing.

I also pay attention to how it impacts people. Especially newcomers.

Sometimes I can offer newcomers words of encouragement when it wasn't that big of a downvote and explain how the system works.

I write what I think. I don't have an agenda. If I did I'd be using the other accounts I have that are sitting dormant and putting in even more work.

Some people do though... I observe it when I see people trying to write posts just like someone else they saw get high rewards and I watch them flit from one type of the post to another copying rather than defining who they are.

I remember the hordes of makeup tutorials on steemit.

I see a few such trends here when I bother to look at trending (which I try to avoid).

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

I'll openly admit I've been duped by some strange things.

This is part of learning. It'll probably happen again to both you and I.

I mean I got suckered to the tune of $1000 in Crypto by a spear phishing event two months ago. I never thought that would happen. I just got too excited and too haste. Within 5 minutes I knew I'd screwed up. By then it was too late.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I've trained myself well. Marketing/advertising/promotion is where the most misinformation can be found. Even the slightest hint of it will send my brain into high alert. Most times I won't even look for the catch anymore. I just know it's there, somewhere. I skip all the ads. If I truly need something, I just go get it.

0
0
0.000
avatar

There's a huge difference between a whistleblower and a whistle blowing charlatan.

Another mind blower...? I don't feel I'm writing that correctly.

I can't speak for the media or politics. I can speak from one personal event. The difference, in my opinion, is support. I worked in radiation protection in my youth and during a routine survey of a pure-water system I identified radioactive contamination. Generally speaking, it meant that radioactive liquid existed where it wasn't supposed to exist. Technically speaking, it meant part of a pure-water system boundary didn't function properly.

Given the training and qualifications I had to endure for the job, my report got attention. However, given the ramifications of what I found, I received immediate negative feedback. I even received accusations of fraud and incompetence. I didn't know what to do. The discovery convinced the higher ups of fraud that "clearly" occurred in my work group. Except, it didn't turn out the way they thought.

I got monitored by everyone and anyone in authority at work. They all came to watch me survey the area and equipment. One day, one of the board members came down after I was being watched all day. One of the samples I collected revealed no contamination. I kid you not I was accused of falsifying information and creating a conspiracy. When a radiation health officer accompanying him chimed in about my no-contamination result I said this:

  • "You guys have been having me monitored all day surveying the exact same area and equipment"
  • "Gamma-spectrum analyses of each sample revealed radioactivity that was reduced each time I sampled"
  • "Each time I sample, I am reducing the levels of contamination in the area by virtue of the analyses I perform"
  • "All results to QA as required by procedure and regulation".

Once QA and the regulators got involved, my job was no longer in jeopardy and the accusations of fraudulence and conspiracy stopped. Repairs of the system amounted in the millions.

At the end of the day, scientific analyses or perfect analytical methods prevailed, but it could not overwhelm the majority opinion. When the majority supported an opinion contrary to the facts, the truth didn't protect me.

And my supervisor? Bless his heart. He was the only person that supported. Everyone else kept their distance during the event. He was the one who sent all the results to QA.

Support matters, but hopefully that support will lean towards the truth.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

0
0
0.000