This assumes that people's thoughts are influenced proportionally by the news sources they encounter. Data on what they actually share or...
-
-
-
...promote on social media *suggests* otherwise. But it is fair to say measuring the impact of this stuff is a very difficult business.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This is so clearly refuted by just about anyone’s lived experience throughout the 2016 US election… the Internet was awash with total crap.
-
And I refuse to believe that nobody actually read the headlines/stories because I had people shrieking at me about it on a near-daily basis.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
1/ what is diff betw fake news site and real news site the reader doesnt trust? what if "fake news" main outcome is no one trusts any news?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
2/also taleb point that small %of pop can taint entire population. if 5-10% of pop believe/preach fake news, entire pop may end up believing
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
FB generates outsized traffic to fake news site but the audience is tiny. The real harm is in creating distrust to reputable media.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not convinced: https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.07592
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.