21–30 of 229 posts
This is intriguing. Assuming more research confirms this effect, I'd go so far as to say it should be taught in schools and should be a standard part of everyone's education. Imagine a society where everyone has a stronger resistance to disinformation. It seems like it could only be a good thing.
But then how will you build societal cohesion through propaganda? Could be a double-edged sword
It's interesting to play through, and they've created other tools such as Twitter bot detectors to help curb disinformation: https://osome.iuni.iu.edu/tools/
But, I have a general criticism about this area of research, which seems to conflate the semantic truth. value of content with the content itself, for example in statements like "fake news spreads faster" (veracity is an extrinsic property of data, and not one that is cognitively accessible to its consumers, and so can have no causal role in it's dissemination). Instead, the relevant variables can only be things like: sensationalism, accords with priors, emotional response, etc.
Still, when it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then how will you build societal cohesion through propaganda? Could be a double-edged sword
We dont need propaganda to stop people from fighting with each other. Diversity is a strength.
Key quote from the article: To gauge the effects of the game, players were asked to rate the reliability of a series of different headlines and tweets before and after gameplay. They were randomly allocated a mixture of real (“control”) and fake news (“treatment”). The study, published today in the journal Palgrave Communications, showed the perceived reliability of fake news before playing the game had reduced by an…
If only we could "inoculate" people against mainstream media, then we'd really be talking.
It offers the player the option to tweet "The Mainstream media is one massive conspiracy". It punishes the player if they choose options not in line with ethical journalistic behavior (as defined by the game). So, things like questioning the events of 9/11, vaccines, and other taboo subjects affect your score.
questions were framed as tweets from legitimate news organizations that did not include any attempts at misleading the audience.
It will be interesting to see what the data coming from this research and what Google's response will be to this week's Google employee insider reporting that Google controls online narratives.
Something is tampering with news data. Is it the lonely people in their basements (by the tens of thousands), a conspiracy, or machine Learning?
Key quote from the article: To gauge the effects of the game, players were asked to rate the reliability of a series of different headlines and tweets before and after gameplay. They were randomly allocated a mixture of real (“control”) and fake news (“treatment”). The study, published today in the journal Palgrave Communications, showed the perceived reliability of fake news before playing the game had reduced by an…
Unless I missed it, it looks like they didn't control for the effects of their own survey. For all we know, taking 15 minutes to drink tea between ranking news reliability.
This is intriguing. Assuming more research confirms this effect, I'd go so far as to say it should be taught in schools and should be a standard part of everyone's education. Imagine a society where everyone has a stronger resistance to disinformation. It seems like it could only be a good thing.
But then how will you build societal cohesion through propaganda? Could be a double-edged sword
I like how this links to the same site that the currently trending HN post "I was 7 words away from being spear-phished" involved :P (note: no reason to believe THIS post is phishing, just funny to see the same url)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then how will you build societal cohesion through propaganda? Could be a double-edged sword
Relying on propaganda for social stability is a recipe for authoritarianism.