Ugh. I started off hopeful reading this article, but it ended on a sour note. Legitimate, but disheartening.
-
-
-
Not sure how legitimate this is. Was the sample representative of the public or skewed in some way? They defined fake news as “intentionally and verifiably false and could mislead readers” but what kinds of items did they actually include in their sample here? Many items R false
-
but not intentionally bc publisher lives in fk news bubble & believes them. There R many kinds of fk nws that cd/ve bn tested; only a few were. Being taken in by fk nws 2 them is "going on 2 read similar articles." What if ppl didn'tm bc they didn't want 2 read same "news" twice?
-
"That majority of Americans support O' care & do not support tax law is proof that accurate reporting still matters" No. Just bc RW bubble is less than 1/2 of population, doesn't mean they don't believe fk news or that RW doesn't determine elections, where far less than 100% vote
-
Bannon/Mercers won 2016 4 T, mostly thru fk nws aimed @ Dems, not just thru RW fk news. Ban/Mrcrs played MSM, RW media & soc. media like fiddles, immersing them in HC bashing propag., getting likely Dem voters 2 not vote 4 HC. Dems nd 2 wake up, fight backhttps://medium.com/@upine/superior-use-of-science-and-technology-won-the-2016-election-6cc098f3bf7e …
-
Doesn't matter how many sources you read if they're all saying the same thing.
-
True.
-
I do think that NYrker author overgeneralized fr limited results of a couple of studies. We R absolutely swimming in RW propganda in the U.S. & its effects R large. Life Imitates Bots & Trolls: Deceiving the Public thru Fake Crowd Creation & Other Lieshttps://medium.com/@upine/life-imitates-bots-fake-crowd-creation-4447cc5e0527 …
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm always curious what samples were used and how the data were selected . I would suspect that most of the rural Trump supporters are not likely to be interested in taking surveys. Similarly to surveying polling data, that proved to be in accurate in predicting the presidency.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"but we almost never observe respondents reading a fact-check of a specific claim in a fake news article that they read.” Probably true but in my experience it doesn't seem to persuade them anyway. It's too easy to say fact checking is fake news too and the cycle keeps going.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Subscriptions fund reporting. What is the point of this essay?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
new release date- now pushed forward to 9 a.m. jan 5th! Kindle edition: Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House by Michael Wolff for $14.99http://amzn.to/2qpYayW
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.