How Fake News Goes Viral: A Case Study

> I think the alternative that nobody is in control at all is even more scary for some people (maybe all people).

But that's not true either, those two are not the only possibilities. The fact is that what happens in the world is usually due to the collective action of many different people and groups, with converging and diverging opinions. It's something like vector math, the resultant vector determines direction of decision making. The mass narrative which has been sold is that no one is in control, and things just happen. Which is also not true. Implicit conspiracy is common, when those interests converge.

The headline might as well as be mass propaganda techniques no longer working. HALP! Or maybe mass propaganda techniques have been democratized. HALP!

Why make this an attack specifically against Americans?

Plenty of dumb people everywhere. Fake news, state news, no news, they'll eat it up.

I've basically given up on trying to show anyone any sort of truth. A third of my life is over and we're not even to the point where 10/10 people could tell you which way is up without consulting some blog or CNN.

I just gotta carve the best life I can, regardless of any mob rule.

Looks like their site is using ads from Google, their party will be over soon.

edit: already banned by facebook, that was fast.

It isn't just that people aren't critical in their thinking, they just tend to be more critical in their thinking about things that violate their experience (read: things they disagree with) than things that they expect.

For example, are you critical of the floor being solid when you get out of bed? You probably wouldn't spend extra milliseconds contemplating they hardness of the floor. Now let's say you get up and the floor is wet. You might take a moment thinking about what happened, looking up at the ceiling, whether the dog peed, did someone spill water, etc.

That is an extreme example, but many people find it very difficult to critically analyze everything they come in contact with. It helps immensely that things like political opinions are controversial, so we are at least aware of other possibilities, but it is still very difficult to accept something that contradicts what is established in our minds, even when that which is established is wrong. So it isn't just that we need to be critical, it is we must be somewhat critical[0] of even things we believe when there is at least some doubt to their validity.

[0] I actually wouldn't call this being critical, but rather, being open-minded to being incorrect.

To be fair to the article, the origin of the misconception was a single tweet, which I'm not sure really counts as "non-approved" news sources. The second stage of the stories spread was reddit, which I think too isn't really a news source, or may be that's what you mean.