General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNew York Times: How the Internet is loosening our grip on the truth
This seems like a fascinating article that at least partially attempts to explain why we see so much (especially in social media) truthiness and outright lying during any discussions - at least it is worth a read (and the comments are pretty thoughtful as well).
I've been very concerned that the DNC didn't seem to have as large a presence in online venues (especially social media) and it seems to me the Trump campaign has relied heavily on bullying tactics and overwhelming numbers on social media to gain support and to especially fear-and-smear Clinton. We all know that fear-and-smear isn't a new tactic for the wingnuts, but the relentless campaign to cite bogus stories from dubious web sites (and the difficulty in factchecking) has reached tidal proportions. Since millions of Americans get their news through links onilne now, it also worries me that this has become part of the political campaigning of the future and it doesn't bode well for our system of government on ANY level at all.
Next week, if all goes well, someone will win the presidency. What happens after that is anyones guess. Will the losing side believe the results? Will the bulk of Americans recognize the legitimacy of the new president? And will we all be able to clean up the piles of lies, hoaxes and other dung that have been hurled so freely in this hyper-charged, fact-free election?
Much of that remains unclear, because the internet is distorting our collective grasp on the truth. Polls show that many of us have burrowed into our own echo chambers of information. In a recent Pew Research Center survey, 81 percent of respondents said that partisans not only differed about policies, but also about basic facts.
Today dozens of news outlets routinely fact-check the candidates and much else online, but the endeavor has proved largely ineffective against a tide of fakery.
Thats because the lies have also become institutionalized. There are now entire sites whose only mission is to publish outrageous, completely fake news online (like real news, fake news has become a business). Partisan Facebook pages have gotten into the act; a recent BuzzFeed analysis of top political pages on Facebook showed that right-wing sites published false or misleading information 38 percent of the time, and lefty sites did so 20 percent of the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/03/technology/how-the-internet-is-loosening-our-grip-on-the-truth.html?_r=0
elleng
(130,974 posts)kevinbgoode1
(153 posts)dalton99
(781 posts)marlakay
(11,475 posts)On them. If more and more of us join blogs that can verify we are who we say we are, true age, sex, etc maybe we wouldn't be surrounded by lies.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)One enabling factor in social media is muting voices you don't like. People are opening communication with their own channels and shutting off dissenting views. I don't see the false right-wing memes much because my list of block media and persons is very long. But without the ability to make it disappear, I'd be forced to challenge it much more, I'd not tolerate the contamination of me feed just as I'd not tolerate the false bullshit in my physical space.
Twitter politics has become a complete sewer, but if following science sites is your thing, the sewer is unseen. Subscribing to YouTube channels is a good example of selective media control. But have they sold their souls to bring you autoplay messaging? Why do I get a Trey Gowdy or Trump video following my interest in progressive politicians? To what extent is money directing what we see? Facebook controls who you see, what you see. Is political dark money deciding that for you?