How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation • Hacker News Board

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#21

Post by Florin_Andrei » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:47 PM UTC

> Twitter is making the news dumber. The service is insidery and clubby. It exacerbates groupthink. It prizes pundit-ready quips over substantive debate, and it tends to elevate the silly over the serious — for several sleepless hours this week it was captivated by “covfefe,” which was essentially a brouhaha over a typo.

This paragraph captures the essence of it perfectly.

The medium basically encourages superficial thinking, or lack of thinking altogether. It's appropriate for rumors and informal shout-outs and chats, but not much more than that.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#22

Post by leereeves » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:47 PM UTC

ue_ wrote: post #18

WillPostForFood wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Been to silicon valley? It is about 80% liberal big business, with a smattering of rogue libertarians.

"Liberal" doesn't mean left, though. What's 'left' about big business? Or capitalism? Just because "liberal" ideas are frequently found around leftist ones, it doesn't mean that leftism is liberal, nor does it mean that liberalism is leftist.

"Liberal" as used in America usually means leftist. The original meaning of the word is largely forgotten.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#23

Post by linkregister » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:51 PM UTC

nfRfqX5n wrote: post #17

fairly easy to spot the bots, but they all follow each other and have at least one (usually only one) picture of "themselves" to seem legit. the content of their twitter is all retweets or harsh responses. click on any political trending topic and see for yourself. this has been going on for well over a year now, really surprised twitter can't figure out a decent solution like shadowbanning

I agree with everything you said, the bots will respond with inapplicable snarky responses to the target their programmer wishes to delegitimize. "Check your sources" for a post from CNN talking about their lunch today, etc.

I disagree that shadowbanning is a good idea; any frequent Twitter user remembers the controversy surrounding various outspoken celebrities claiming they were being shadowbanned as a result of their views.

Probably a better solution would be to require a daily captcha or other solution to add friction and cost to bot operators.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#24

Post by linkregister » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:53 PM UTC

wand3r wrote: post #13

epistasis wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm no Trump supporter but I have screen caps of single digit election predictions; e.g. 90/10 Hillary. Yes, of course you do, these have been well documented by the same sources that produced the models. Why would you feel the need to screen cap them? Why would you put this statement next to fake news? Do you not understand what was in your screencap?

538 was being laughed at for 70/30 or greater and HuffPo and NYT had Hillary dancing on stage with Jay Z. I screen capped various organizations refusing to update polls, refusing to post WikiLeaks info and above all refusing to do the fucking news . NYT broke Watergate which was embargoed by the president. I will never forgive them for how shameful and cowardly they have become. I am sure there are great men and wome…

The Washington Post broke Watergate.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#25

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:53 PM UTC

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #21

> Twitter is making the news dumber. The service is insidery and clubby. It exacerbates groupthink. It prizes pundit-ready quips over substantive debate, and it tends to elevate the silly over the serious — for several sleepless hours this week it was captivated by “covfefe,” which was essentially a brouhaha over a typo. This paragraph captures the essence of it perfectly. The medium basically encourages superficial…

[deleted]

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#26

Post by fgandiya » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:53 PM UTC

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #21

> Twitter is making the news dumber. The service is insidery and clubby. It exacerbates groupthink. It prizes pundit-ready quips over substantive debate, and it tends to elevate the silly over the serious — for several sleepless hours this week it was captivated by “covfefe,” which was essentially a brouhaha over a typo. This paragraph captures the essence of it perfectly. The medium basically encourages superficial…

Yeah, I'm starting to notice this too. I wish the article expanded on this assessment.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#27

Post by linkregister » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:55 PM UTC

wand3r wrote: post #13

epistasis wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm no Trump supporter but I have screen caps of single digit election predictions; e.g. 90/10 Hillary. Yes, of course you do, these have been well documented by the same sources that produced the models. Why would you feel the need to screen cap them? Why would you put this statement next to fake news? Do you not understand what was in your screencap?

538 was being laughed at for 70/30 or greater and HuffPo and NYT had Hillary dancing on stage with Jay Z. I screen capped various organizations refusing to update polls, refusing to post WikiLeaks info and above all refusing to do the fucking news . NYT broke Watergate which was embargoed by the president. I will never forgive them for how shameful and cowardly they have become. I am sure there are great men and wome…

> refusing to post WikiLeaks info

NYT, among others, has been widely castigated by Democrats for putting Hillary Email stories on their front page.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#28

Post by awinter-py » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 6:59 PM UTC

I'm a twitter troll but not by choice -- you need to have organic activity to advertise on their platform.

Selection bias at work here but my push-stream is 80% journalists/writers 20% schizophrenics. I can't imagine anyone being on there by choice. My adrenal glands are shot from 6 weeks of semi-pro use.

If NYT is going to argue that people are being deceived they need to explain what people are doing on the platform. Is anyone on there really not complicit in having strong emotions spewed at them by B-list brookings wonks?

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#29

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 7:05 PM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #22

ue_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Liberal" doesn't mean left, though. What's 'left' about big business? Or capitalism? Just because "liberal" ideas are frequently found around leftist ones, it doesn't mean that leftism is liberal, nor does it mean that liberalism is leftist.

"Liberal" as used in America usually means leftist. The original meaning of the word is largely forgotten.

> "Liberal" as used in America usually means leftist. The original meaning of the word is largely forgotten.

"Liberal/conservative" and "left/right" both, in their original political definitions, describe essentially the same divide (the former comes from England, the latter from revolutionary France.)

They've diverged in modern usage somewhat because debate over the desirability of the movement of the locus of government power from personal prerogative of hereditary elites based on class right to the public at large based on individual rights is no longer the primary meaningful divide in the developed world, and rather debate over the precise nature of individual rights and the manner in which they should shape governance, most of which fits within the original liberal/left space (and the rest outside the classic right/left or liberal/conservative divide), is now current.

Re: How Twitter Is Being Gamed to Feed Misinformation

#30

Post by TheRealDunkirk » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 7:05 PM UTC

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #21

> Twitter is making the news dumber. The service is insidery and clubby. It exacerbates groupthink. It prizes pundit-ready quips over substantive debate, and it tends to elevate the silly over the serious — for several sleepless hours this week it was captivated by “covfefe,” which was essentially a brouhaha over a typo. This paragraph captures the essence of it perfectly. The medium basically encourages superficial…

It "encourages" superficiality because it precludes "substantive debate" by reason of its artificial character limit.

I'm surprised. I managed to make that point in 120 characters. I've had several accounts, over the years, trying to get into it. I can't stand that you can't really put anything substantive in 140 characters, and I hate split tweets, to provide context, just like this, even more.