Live data from Hacker News

‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

cam.ac.uk

51–60 of 229 posts

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#51
post #37

So you mean Fox News?

Please don't take HN threads further into political flamewar. Those are low-quality discussions and we're trying for something a bit better here.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20286990 and marked it off-topic.

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#52
post #37

So you mean Fox News?

Every major network pushes their own narrative. I wouldn't single Fox News out at all.

There is a revolving door between the Trump administration and Fox News today, with multiple high-profile Fox News personalities campaigning with Trump.

This is not normal. Previous presidents, regardless of political party, did not engage in this behavior.

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#53
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every major network pushes their own narrative. I wouldn't single Fox News out at all.

"Both sides do it!" is a really unconvincing argument. Watch an hour of prime-time CNN and prime-time Fox News, and it's obvious that Fox is more willing to stretch the truth, mislead watchers, and spread FUD.

I would be more willing to single out Hannity than Fox News as a whole. Some of the prime time shows on Fox are opinion/entertainment rather than actual news.

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#55
post #49
post #35

The "best" fake news these days is the stuff that doesn't register even to people are read-in on the usual anti-patterns. Subtle framing, selective quotation, anonymous sources, "repeat the lie" techniques, and so on, are the ones that I see happening today that are hard to immunize yourself from. Ironically, the people who fall for these are more likely to self-identify as being aware and clued in on how to avoid fa…

Second best. The best is selective reporting. Even if every story is reported 100% accurately and objectively, by choosing which stories are promoted, and which buried, you can set any agenda you want. Edit: See https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2019/05/Causes-of-death-i... for an example.

Speaking of, I saw a particularly blatant example yesterday:

https://twitter.com/scottsantens/status/1142442971922653184

I've been following the Andrew Yang campaign since his appearance on the Joe Rogan show and so far as I can tell MSNBC has been at it for months now.

The gall still astonishes me: 20 candidates qualified for the debates, he now polls in the top 8 and betting markets even place him in the top five, and they substitute someone who did not even qualify for the debate for him.

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#56

"Fake news" isn't the problem, it's the symptom of a mainstream media landscape which has sacrificed its credibility for partisanship, activism, and sensationalism. People are willing to believe new sources because they don't know who to trust.

Which is a lesson in itself isn't it? How can we be sure there even exists an objective reality when not only can we not trust what we learn second hand, but also cannot trust our own senses or memory? We are in the awkward position of simultaneously needing to be skeptical of our understanding of the world while simultaneously having no choice but to act as though it were correct.

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#57
post #49
post #35

The "best" fake news these days is the stuff that doesn't register even to people are read-in on the usual anti-patterns. Subtle framing, selective quotation, anonymous sources, "repeat the lie" techniques, and so on, are the ones that I see happening today that are hard to immunize yourself from. Ironically, the people who fall for these are more likely to self-identify as being aware and clued in on how to avoid fa…

Second best. The best is selective reporting. Even if every story is reported 100% accurately and objectively, by choosing which stories are promoted, and which buried, you can set any agenda you want. Edit: See https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2019/05/Causes-of-death-i... for an example.

Related: Google is doing this. https://www.allsides.com/blog/audit-finds-evidence-googles-b...

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#59
post #35

The "best" fake news these days is the stuff that doesn't register even to people are read-in on the usual anti-patterns. Subtle framing, selective quotation, anonymous sources, "repeat the lie" techniques, and so on, are the ones that I see happening today that are hard to immunize yourself from. Ironically, the people who fall for these are more likely to self-identify as being aware and clued in on how to avoid fa…

Precisely, the subtle "bias" in traditional news is extremely powerful to pull mindshare this way or that. It's not tabloid level shit like spacemen are coming to get you, but wrapped as trustworthy articles vetted by sources, studies or science.

This is true, but the biggest problem today is people who have gone to the other extreme and have been told to not trust anything that appears to be "trustworthy articles vetted by sources, studies or science". Like, because something cites scientific research, or tries to appear to be credible and informative rather than just straight up telling people how to feel, they disbelieve it because it doesn't feel right to them for some reason. Plenty of examples: anti-vaxxers, Alex Jones listeners, etc.

I'm much, much more worried about people these days who say they don't "believe" in science than I am about subtle biases couched in seemingly credible articles, because more often than not people playing the "subtle bias"/"don't trust the mainstream media" card are actually trying to discount the value of science or peer review or expertise, far far more often than they're trying to highlight propaganda hidden in plain sight.

Re: ‘Pre-bunk’ game reduces susceptibility to disinformation

#60
'It’s Easier to Fool People Than to Convince Them That They Have Been Fooled' Making people take push poll style 'tests' and asking them to then believe they are more discerning is really stretching it.

The larger issue today is arguably suppressed information, which leads people when they find it to jump to conclusions based on lack of contextual data. Ass in 'official' versions of events that don't make sense and you are feeding a wildfire of paranoia

Post reply on HN