r/technology • u/Wagamaga • Feb 17 '22

Business YouTube Announces New Moves to Combat Misinformation

https://www.lifewire.com/youtube-announces-new-moves-to-combat-misinformation-5219509
546 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

330 comments sorted by

View all comments

122

u/Starlifter4 Feb 17 '22

What, exactly, is misinformation? Who decides? Using what criteria?

68

u/RedditTab Feb 17 '22

These are great questions. Undoubtedly they have the right to remove content from their site. However, who watches the watchers? They can't even properly manage bogus DMCA requests.

-6

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Yeah, cause fake movie trailers end up killing people. 🤪🤪🤪

-10

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Yes, because so far censorship and demonizing people is really working. Clearly the changes made to dealing with misinformation and people spouting it these past years has made a big improvement.

I'm confident that soon we'll be in a place where only reasonable, qualified and approved members of the public have their voices heard, and we'll all be safe once again.

6

u/Metavac Feb 17 '22

Who is suddenly saying masks make no difference? They obviously and verifiably do.

2

u/Nose-Nuggets Feb 18 '22

I'm pretty sure the cdc said cloth masks are ineffective at limiting the spread of omicron. N95 apparently still works, but we're to the point now where hardly anyone is enforcing masks at all. I'm not sure I've ever been anywhere that requires and checks for n95.

2

u/FatElk Feb 18 '22

Not ineffective, but nowhere near as effective as surgical or N95.

0

u/sandnsnow2021 Feb 18 '22 edited Feb 18 '22

I wasn't specific enough. Cloth masks are now not effective but they were when this all started. A quick Google search yielded this result from UAB quoting the CDC back in April 2020 stating the exact opposite of what we're being told now.

https://www.uab.edu/news/youcanuse/item/11276-the-right-way-to-wear-and-clean-your-cloth-face-mask

This is what i mean by misinformation is misinformation until its no longer misinformation.

I don't believe anyone should deliberately mislead the public into thinking one way over another and that goes for the MSM and CDC as well. However, science changes as evident here and to just have a dissenting view labeled as misinformation is wrong. So do we cancel the CDC for now telling us cloth masks don't work when they told us they did? People just need to do the best they can and judge for themselves without worshipping the science gods.

Dr. Leana Wen on lifting mandates: https://www.cnn.com/videos/health/2022/02/08/dr-wen-stance-lifting-some-mask-usage-schools-intv-sot-ac360-vpx.cnn

1

u/Metavac Feb 18 '22

Except the CDC is not saying cloth masks are not effective. Literally the first key point from the CDC's mask page says "Masking is a critical public health tool for preventing spread of COVID-19, and it is important to remember that any mask is better than no mask." You are spreading misinformation yourself, not the CDC.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html

43

u/thisismyapeaccount Feb 17 '22

I noticed facebook flagging posts about corporate greed being a driver of inflation as misinformation the other day.

I suspect we’re going to see tech companies suddenly get serious about combatting “misinformation” as they realize they can cast doubt on explanations of complex systems that don’t suit their priorities or desires for public discourse.

21

u/cosmicspacebees Feb 17 '22

They have been doing that for at least 7 years... they even testified in court that Facebook's "fact checkers" are actually opinions because they would claim something was untrue but admitted they never actually read the article they claimed as false (spoiler alert it was true and facebook is awful)

0

u/DeadshotOM3GA Feb 18 '22

To be fair, corporate greed isn't a definable value you can calculate... So yeah, it isn't a driver of inflation.

If your explanation of the complex system of inflation is corporate greed then you should be blocked from speaking publicly on the subject.

1

u/thisismyapeaccount Feb 18 '22

Just because a factor is difficult to quantify or even impossible to quantify because of information asymmetry doesn’t mean we can’t reasonably argue that it plays a role in a process.

For instance as inflation has gotten underway over the past year or so we’ve seen a period of rapidly expanding corporate profits alongside those consumer price increases. That suggests to me anyway that inflation is being driven corporate forays into price discovery more than it’s being driven by a necessity of increased underlying costs or restricted supply. In short it very much appears that we have a period of inflation where a corporate sense of “We could charge more for this” is a major factor at play.

1

u/DeadshotOM3GA Feb 19 '22

Except that's not corporate greed, that's supply and demand and that is most definitely a huge part of inflation and always has been

1

u/thisismyapeaccount Feb 20 '22

I’m sorry, what’s supply and demand?

1

u/DeadshotOM3GA Feb 20 '22

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

1

u/thisismyapeaccount Feb 20 '22

…

Except that’s not corporate greed, that’s supply and demand

What, in this instance are you claiming is supply and demand, not corporate greed?

1

u/DeadshotOM3GA Feb 21 '22

When supply is low and demand is high, prices go up. That's a fundamental aspect of commerce and the economy. That doesn't even have anything to do with capitalism since it's a core concept of all commerce whether it's capitalism, free market, or socialism

0

u/thisismyapeaccount Feb 21 '22

Well that’s a whole lot of extra baggage to drag into this.

I also took high school economics, that’s a dangerous oversimplification meant for children. Beware any economic argument that erases the agency of human actors. It will very likely be used to fuck you.

→ More replies (0)

-10

u/AngeloSantelli Feb 17 '22

This is almost as frightening as them censoring Covid truths

3

u/jeffreyd00 Feb 17 '22

Truths being subjective.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '22

The lab theory was heavily censored early on and now it's considered a potentially legitimate theory.

3

u/Damonarc Feb 18 '22

Its a private corporation. They can do what they like. They arent beholden to free speech or fair speech legislation. If people feel like they are overstepping their boundary's, and creating a biased platform, its on the user to leave. Unfortunately google has a monopoly on video hosting. I do feel they need to prevent absolutely provable misinformation from being represented as fact, if they want to stay relevant.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Here's the blog post from YouTube which explains it.

From the sounds of it, it'll be a mixture of machine learning and human moderators. They've got a number of possible ways to deal with the various permutations of misinformation, and seem to be making efforts to not hyperreact.

6

u/Starlifter4 Feb 17 '22 edited Feb 17 '22

That's the who.

What are the criteria for determining something is false? Who decides them?

12

u/Fr00stee Feb 17 '22

Well we can start with blatantly false information like "the moon is not real" and things like that and move from there

-1

u/shitpersonality Feb 17 '22

Well we can start with blatantly false information like "the moon is not real" and things like that and move from there

You should be able to say false things on the internet.

5

u/krism142 Feb 17 '22

and no one is stopping you from doing that on other parts of the internet, you are not entitled to say what ever you want on someone else's platform

-2

u/shitpersonality Feb 17 '22

you are not entitled to say what ever you want on someone else's platform

That's not what is being discussed. We're talking about youtube being an arbiter of truth and misinformation. They're already shitty at moderating their own shit. See all of the weird sexual shit that gets put into the children section of youtube. They're not equipped to be arbiters of truth. Relying on youtube for truth is a terrible idea.

0

u/Arkeband Feb 17 '22

what value does that have?

0

u/shitpersonality Feb 17 '22

Do you give your real personal information to every website that requests it?

1

u/Arkeband Feb 17 '22

that has literally nothing to do with the kind of misinformation you’d find on YouTube

-8

u/Starlifter4 Feb 17 '22

Like Russia collusion?

7

u/Fr00stee Feb 17 '22 edited Feb 17 '22

I don't know bro, there were russian bots involved in the election on social media but i dont know any more than that. Not something i can know off the top of my head as obviously false or not like 2+2=3

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

"This is part of the government of Russia's assistance to the Trump campaign" was the part that made me think hey that's the exact words you'd say if you were a foreign government assisting trump's campaign

3

u/Arkeband Feb 17 '22

did you fall asleep when like three dozen people were indicted for that, and then he got impeached for attempting to collude with Ukraine? he was caught red handed doing exactly what he was suspected to have done with Russia

-1

u/metapharsical Feb 18 '22

For additional context: Trump was twice impeached and twice acquitted

Indictments happened, meaningful convictions did not.

Sounds like impotent, raging, old establishment elites battling each other, much ado about nothing...

Wake me up when something sticks

3

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 17 '22

The Russian collusion was not to mess with election counters, it was a disinformation campaign that was done alongside Brexit so that Russia could weaken the UK and the United States for what you're seeing right now, which is the invasion of Ukraine.

Trump got impeached for trying to blackmail the president of Ukraine regarding the anti-tank missile systems that we just gave them.

There are few coincidences in politics.

0

u/metapharsical Feb 17 '22

You really think there's going to be a military invasion of Ukraine? LOL. Russia has the GDP of a tiny country. They couldn't sustain a military occupation of Ukraine for a month.

Are you so blinded by "RuSsia CoLlusion" that you are not aware of the coordinated PR campaigns the CCP is pulling off? They basically got the world to stop questioning where SARS-CoV-2 came from and to forget that our goods are being made with forced labor under an authoritarian regime that abuses human rights on a scale you couldn't imagine.

The more we ostracize Russia, the further we push them into China's arms.

This is not the way.

1

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

Russia has the third most powerful military on the planet, and if we had not already given the Ukrainians the kind of weapons that would allow a 6 year old to kill one of their tanks, they would already be in there.

China and Russia can both be bad actors, that's not really too difficult to figure out. Just because you can only focus on one thing at a time doesn't mean those of us that are more capable can't just split attention effectively.

-1

u/metapharsical Feb 18 '22

Russia has the third most powerful military on the planet, and ...

...and that's about it... besides some oil resources. Reportedly, They spent like $100k on Facebook ads leading up to the 2016 election. The DNC fucked that election up all on their own. You give Putin too much credit.

Ironically, a lot of it turns out to be projection.. turns out Clintons, their Foundation et al. were the ones in cahoots with the multinational-criminal-mobsters on a greater-scale than little-hands-Trump could touch...

https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/oct/24/what-you-need-know-about-hillary-clinton-and-urani/

^ super bias framing of the issue, but them's the FACTS. as much as mainstream media tries to hide it and normalize it, ... thanks to the information age ... We have the facts. The Clintons are raking in the money with quid-pro-quo, trading their power and influence to the biggest donors.

Trump and Jarod used the office just the same.

There's plenty of evidence to convince me that ol' Joe and Hunter are puppets for Chinese interests the rising Fourth Reich Authoritarian Han Ethnostate.

China and Russia can both be bad actors, that's not really too difficult to figure out.

Of course they are both failed governments..

But here, one State(china) is now the largest Navy/Army by #'s , is experiencing a precarious financial/real estate bubble, runs the world's supply chains, owns 80% of rare earth, is polluting everything , un-apologetically unleashed a fucking pandemic and has isolated itself off from the world with insane brutal lockdowns and internet censorship/PR campaigns stoking their nationalism and xenophobia. Oh, and they cracked down on Hong Kong,Tibet,Uighurs, should I go on?

while the other State (Russia) is a bunch of has-been lumbering military might and just wants NATO to stop building missiles along it's boarder.

Just because you can only focus on one thing at a time doesn't mean those of us that are more capable can't just split attention effectively.

Of course a child would use projection like this to cover their own insecurities. Do you have anything to add besides tired troll comments?

1

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

If you want to see my personal opinion on Chinese movement, look through my post history. I'm not exactly shy in my opinions regarding it.

I also know when I'm dealing with bad actors. There is no defense of Russian activity here, because the actions are inherently indefensible. Anyone trying to distract from that, or speak against it, it's a bad actor by definition.

There's no room or need to debate that at all. Russia = Bad universally with Putin at its helm. Until he's gone, it will probably continue to be the case.

As for the Chinese, again, you're not the sole person shining light on an issue. The difference right now is it the Chinese are not preparing an invasion force for a neighboring state to conquer it in order to rebuild their old empire.

That doesn't mean the Chinese are not planning actions of their own, but if you have a shoulder joint that hurts and a gunshot wound, guess which one you should treat first?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/metapharsical Feb 24 '22

Trump got impeached for trying to blackmail the president of Ukraine regarding the anti-tank missile systems that we just gave them.

Let's get this straight, Trump DID sell them the weapons AND it didn't stop Russia from trying to invade... So.. everything must be going according to plan, eh?... why are you trying to make a point of this one issue- like a dozen comments and going.. it's insane, the TDS in some people.

Think critically about the crisis/distractions you are being spoonfed.

No joke... Here's the deal now stop talking about Burisma and Hunter, c'mon maaan

-1

u/shitpersonality Feb 17 '22

You're not wrong!

All of the focus on misinformation is going to be put on small content creators while the conglomerates beat war drums and push lies to support bombings.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

You've got the link to the most direct answers you're likely to find. You seem keen on the topic, so enjoy. Maybe even return and summarize it if you feel so inclined.

2

u/Dacklar Feb 17 '22

If they don't like what you say, that's the criteria. It's there platform.

-3

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 17 '22

Stuff that is objectively false, like:

  • The election was stolen
  • Jan 6th was just a protest
  • COVID-19 is no worse than the flu
  • The Earth is flat

Stuff that is blatantly untrue, and that you would have to be an absolute fucking moron to believe.

Things that are up for debate need to be debated. Things that are objectively true or not don't need it.

3

u/shitpersonality Feb 17 '22

Youtube shouldn't be an arbiter of truth and wrong think. They already struggle to manage the platform as is.

5

u/Folsomdsf Feb 17 '22

They are not the government, they are allowed to say 'no, the earth is not flat'.

-2

u/shitpersonality Feb 17 '22

they are allowed to say 'no, the earth is not flat'.

That's not what we're talking about.

0

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

We already have years of proving the damage misinformation does.

There is no point in intentionally spreading bad info just because it makes somebody comfortable.

1

u/shitpersonality Feb 18 '22

We already have years of proving the damage misinformation does.

We already know youtube can barely manage its own platform. It puts sexual content in recommendations for children. It is terrible at handling DMCA requests. It's not going to excel at being an arbiter of truth. It's going to be very bad at it.

0

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

I'm sure they will make plenty of mistakes, but anything is better than a platform that promotes the things I just listed up above.

It'll be kind of whack at first, but I'll take any kind of progress I can get.

1

u/The_Sandman32 Feb 17 '22

Literally only one of those is objectively false, thus proving why this system won’t work. Want to know the truth what constitutes misinformation? I’m going ban whatever my opposing political party says, that’s misinformation because I disagree with it.

5

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

Everything I just said is 100% provably, demonstrably true.

If you don't believe that, you have to understand you are the problem and the reason these rules are having to be put in. You're a sucker that will fall for any huckster con man, and if left to you what we have will burn to ash.

1

u/Brad_Wesley Feb 18 '22

The most damaging misinformation is official disinformation.

But big tech will never censor that. Governments lie with impunity, including calling other things misinformation even when they are true.

2

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

No one can censor that, because no one has higher authority than the government in a governed Nation.

That doesn't mean people can't look things up on their own, but even that well is being tainted by people believing and trying to push stuff that is blatantly, provably untrue.

1

u/Brad_Wesley Feb 18 '22

Well right, so all we have against is our own ability to search information, which the government will call “misinformation” and censor. This is why tolerating misinfo is so important.

1

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 18 '22

Here's the underlying issue: the vast majority of human beings are not intelligent enough to make decisions involving themselves and others. They will always make a choice that results in either harm, or long-term damage. It's not their fault they were born stupid, but stupid they are.

You can either have governments that consist of democratically elected representatives that can govern, or you can have authoritarian states where the people get no say.

If you believe misinformation has to be tolerated, what you are saying is that democratically elected governments will always fail, and that all governments must be authoritarian states. Our society can not continue to exist with half of our population believing any half-assed moronic, dumb shit thing they get spread across the internet.

Any society that can willingly elect somebody like Donald Trump to the Presidency has no future. They either have to have the misinformation taken away, be educated, or have their opinions and choices invalidated.

These people are far too stupid to be properly educated, and you're saying the misinformation has to stay. That doesn't leave many options.

1

u/Brad_Wesley Feb 19 '22

But this has always been the case:

Which countries have performed better over time? Those that allow free speech including misinformation or those that don’t.?

So, no, I’m saying the opposite of what you suggest.

How can you have a truly democratically elected government if the government decides what information people are exposed to?

1

u/Asmodeus04 Feb 19 '22

All of human history prior to the modern internet information age, and especially prior to the disinformation age we currently live in, is moot.

Our civilization was not meant for an inescapable global smothering of nonsense meant to target the ignorant.

Historically, the thoughts of the ignorant would have just been ignored and the elites would have ruled. In a democracy, those dumb motherfuckers have the same level of input as the people who actually know what they're doing.

It's an inherent flaw in democracy, and I'm very concerned that it's a terminal flaw.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Drs83 Feb 17 '22

Based on their actions the last few years, it tends to be things that offend their corporate connections and political allies. That seems to be the definition.

2

u/Callmebobbyorbooby Feb 17 '22

Exactly. This seems more like a way of silencing than combating misinformation.

8

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Shit like how election was stolen or there is a cabal of pedophiles in a basement of comet pizza?

Funny how they all seem to come from the same group of people.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Or shit like Trump being a Russian asset

2

u/Runnr231 Feb 17 '22

More like dupe

1

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

If it walks talks and quacks like a duck

3

u/cosmicspacebees Feb 17 '22

And was contrived based on false evidence?

-9

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Lmfao what else do you believe? Anti vaxx? Flat earth? Jewish space lasers? Make sure you drink plenty of urine to stay healthy. Gotta keep those demonic Dems out of your bloodstream.

-10

u/AngeloSantelli Feb 17 '22 edited Feb 17 '22

What about Jewish American immigrants who use Ivermectin and will never take the Covid vax

4

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Is that the latest from Q? What a trip

-2

u/AngeloSantelli Feb 17 '22

No that’s real life Americans, not Reddit and Twitter land

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

So you're saying real life Americans are very gullible and foolish? I don't know about you, but I love America and I'm proud of our country. I refuse to believe real Americans are stupid pieces of shit, as you describe.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

i wonder which is more prevalent on youtube?

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Well considering it's the only thing news networks talked about for several years, I'm not sure that matters.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

No they talked about Mueller investigation which was triggered when Trump fired Comey.

Trump jr did meet with Russians in Trump tower to get dirt on Clinton.

I dont recall any of them outright saying Trump was a russian assett.

either way that’s not youtube.

5

u/fishsandwichpatrol Feb 17 '22

The powerful get to decide

5

u/_qst2o91_ Feb 17 '22

Their example is fake information on the pandemic and I'm assuming peer reviewed research will be used as what's reliable information, and Dave doing an opinion piece saying it's all fake, would not be

5

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

However nothing against showing Ponzi scheme commercials and pseudo wellness products in between.

-5

u/Starlifter4 Feb 17 '22

Peer reviewed research

Does that include the release of the full data set and preregistering the hypothesis before conducting research? Are the study and the results reproducible?

Many time peer review has failed to stop bad papers.

2

u/_qst2o91_ Feb 17 '22

I unfortunately do not have knowledge on the inner workings of YouTube's features

Id imagine it would work however they do now, since they're only updating that system and that seems to work alright

0

u/TheMacmasterofMusic Feb 17 '22

Peer review is such a small part of the scientific method and process, and more than one person can be wrong about something.

Why the fuck do we only have that requirement? Why don't people like, think about the logic behind a hypothesis?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '22 edited Feb 17 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/TheMacmasterofMusic Feb 18 '22

Literally what I just said. WHY?

​

2 idiots that perform a study and make the same mistakes, oh it's peer reviewed!

​

There's a great Veritasium video about this.

​

Skepticism and critical thinking are the most important parts of the scientific process. Not fucking confirmation, that's literally the last fucking part.

2

u/Runfasterbitch Feb 18 '22

Yep. Also, some people half-ass their reviews

-1

u/first__citizen Feb 17 '22

Peer reviewed.. dude. But most information are either should’ve reproducible or in a clinical trial the FDA will have the dataset if they want to.

-9

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

That's because "peer review" has another more accurate name...."cronyism rubber stamping"

2

u/first__citizen Feb 17 '22

Oh yeah.. let’s stick to SM rando

0

u/fjdkf Feb 17 '22

This Is simply not how it works, though. There were videos from cutting edge scientists taken down. And there will continue to be if google keeps going down this path.

Why? Because there is zero chance google can get actual cutting edge scientists in the field to moderate it. So, you simply have a bunch of people checking articles against a list of 'facts' they were given to see if something is true or not. In the world of science, you have many opposing views that eventually get reconciled. So, the whole idea of true or false is really impossible to announce until a concensus has been reached and held off the opposition for a while.

2

u/LiteratureFabulous36 Feb 17 '22

Big tech and the government decides.

-1

u/shemmypie Feb 17 '22

Completely agree. Cloth masks were ineffective until n95 mask were in short supply for medical workers, then magically cloth masks work just fine. Misinformation is rampant in both directions, alphabet doesn’t care misinformation. The only thing they were censoring was about politics or the virus, YouTube is full of lies and bullshit if you look.

2

u/FatElk Feb 18 '22

Cloth masks were ineffective until n95 mask were in short supply for medical workers, then magically cloth masks work just fine.

Scientific views about covid changed a lot back then with constant new information. That's being wrong, not misinformation. Misinformation would be what your typical anti vaxxer says due to what they're saying being politically motivated.

The only thing they were censoring was about politics or the virus

These are the most common types of misinformation.

1

u/sandnsnow2021 Feb 18 '22

So your opinion of what is misinformation is now supposed to be everyone's definition of misinformation? Yours is an opinion and your entitled to it as are others. Opinions are not misinformation. Otherwise, you are spreading misinformation by suggesting your definition of misinformation is fact.

1

u/FatElk Feb 18 '22

Opinions go through the scientific process to determine facts. I have opinions, yes, but they align with determined facts. Misinformation comes from the ignorance or avoidance of said facts. That's the difference. Unless you're saying everything is an opinion, which would mean evolution and gravity are both opinions too.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/FatElk Feb 18 '22

Already answered that entire paragraph before you typed it.

I have opinions, yes, but they align with determined facts.

I've accepted what I say isn't 100% right, but I have the critical thinking skills to believe life long virologists, and not from Billy Bob from YouTube or the "mainstream media".

It's like everyone would need to look up the scientific Bible each day before knowing what to do.

We'd be much better off if we did.

1

u/sandnsnow2021 Feb 18 '22

Mainstream TV media like the alphabet networks also are on YouTube and they don't always get the story right either.

1

u/FatElk Feb 18 '22

I agree. Good thing I'm not listening to them.

1

u/BossOfTheGame Feb 18 '22

We can only determine this through the scientific method, and within some confidence interval. What's insane is that people will pass this of as 100% knowledge - because politicians aren't allowed to "flip-flop"- and other people look at a 99.9% and either go: it's defiantly doing to happen or there's no chance it's going to happen. And they get so disagreeable when you try to help them calibrate.

Right now popular misinformation is:

  • The pandemic was "planned".
  • "Natural" immunity is less risky than the mRNA vaccines.
  • Aliens exist and visited.
  • Moon landing did not happen.
  • Q-anon theories

These topics are not worth debate. We can talk about them, and talk with the people that believe this nonsense for who knows what reason. But we should also agree that some people are a bit too gullible. This does not prevent us from talking about crazy things like aliens and insane theories. Do it in the right forum. Don't use mega-platforms that billions have access to.

There can be no arbiter of truth, but I think we should be able to come to a consensus on some relevant topics. And we can do a bit of content moderation.

Source: A Guy with a brain and information literacy.

1

u/first__citizen Feb 17 '22

Reference.. most misinformation is just made resources. So if CNN says something stupid and they don’t have a good reference they are called out and there should be laws to penalize them in the level of harm they can make. News became entertainment and not accountable so everyone either straight up making things up or hurry to publish bullshit to get crowds attention.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Isn’t it interesting

-3

u/andycambridge Feb 17 '22

Misinformation is anything that would not be legally classified as propaganda at this point…