Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
I think misinformation is a special case of the more general category of “bad content”. As long as you think that category exists, regardless of whether we agree about what’s in it, the rest of what I’m saying here should make sense.
Much of the problem is that the technology
IHS advances human flourishing by developing the people and ideas that carry freedom forward.
If most people believe the view, but it is still unsayable in elite institutions then it is still "edgy". Most people do not believe that men can get pregnant, but it has become an HR violation to say so... The article doesn't mention the 51 former intelligence agents that
The marketplace of ideas wasnt a marketplace before free social media. Because then the ideas and arguments was selected by the media and the politicians.
what a trashy hit piece.
bret weinstein’s record on covid in particular is so far superior to everything that came from his fervent critics that this is either a manifestation of true delusion or true malice.
This is why other countries do not want what the American tech companies and MAGA want - unregulated free speech on the internet. This decimates all sane politics.
"The marketplace of ideas" doesn't reach enough people or nearly quick enough. It allows people to peddle nonsense(sometimes dangerous) without the ability to mass correct effectively in real time. It sounds good in theory, but doesn't work as good as it sounds.
Yes the curating function once served by editors and publishers was extremely underrated.
Is it obvious the internet leveled the playing field? I am sure you have more access to me than you would have 20 years ago, but bots controlled by large nations have presumably millions times more reach
Saying: "our grandfathers were right 60 years ago", does not sell. Saying: "everything that has come before is shit and wrong and probably a criminal conspiracy against the public good" sells. On the internet, in newspapers or universities the denial of old truths is rewarded.
I think the article comes across as biased. If alternative media is the problem, how does that explain WaPo cleaning house? Isn't WaPo something you consider a serious news publication?
Quote
Richard Hanania
@RichardHanania
Survey on how conservatives don't actually read anything.
This was 6 years ago! Things have gotten a hundred times dumber since. At this point liberals are probably 5x-10x more likely to read serious news publications than conservatives. richardhanania.com/p/liberals-rea
In regards to the article you shared, I have trouble understanding how someone can have experienced the past 5 years and make this assertion.
Sadly, the marketplace of ideas rewards ideas that are marketable, not necessarily factual. Bullshit has proven to be very marketable
Someone needs to post truth as if it’s a conspiracy. Don’t couch it in evidence and don’t support any of your claims, just act ridiculous.
“I have this theory that oil is actually the dead biomass of ancient humongous animals and that when we use it all, it won’t come back!”
It’s junk food over vegetables. Trash TV over educational media. Just human nature. Not sure how we get that fixed as making the “real” news more grifty/clickbaity makes me sick.
Emotions and feelings are the color and smell/taste of ideas.
when given the choice and no social consequences will eat themselves fat (stupid) on the cheap, tasty, mass produced slop.
we need a massive shame culture around degenerate lines of thought, or ozempic for the brain.
Wow, the elites really burned through their credibility telling chuds that men can be women. And genital mutilation is healthcare. And Epstein killed himself. And the covid vaccine doesn't cause myocarditis. And...