Live data from Hacker News

People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

theverge.com

321–330 of 437 posts

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#321

Anecdotal evidence: I remember how my 65 years old dad changed from a large-minded, world-traveling retired professor to an avid consumer of fake news in the span of fewer than two years. Yes, it was a shock, but most of all I am mortified that this could happen to me as well when I get to his age.

I remember a boss not so long ago, similar age. Started having a rant about a woman that was emailing him, flirting with him. I realised it was some kind of phishing thing. He just took it at face value. He wasn't naïve, and had all his faculties, so it really stuck out. Maybe its like country bumpkins without street smarts, maybe they just havent learned the defenses needed?

It’s pattern recognition and confusion. The news stories that are fake are presented and look the same way as real ones.

I would like to see a study using the same subjects but check to see if they can tell what is a Google search result and what is an ad.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#322
My Dad (mid 70s in age) shares the fake news articles because he thinks they are funny. He still cannot believe that people take so much of this crap seriously. Of course, when you have an elected representative that thinks an island will tip over if you put too many people on it, its not hard to understand where critical thinking has failed.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#323
post #307

Also from the article: "Users who identified as conservative were more likely than users who identified as liberal to share fake news: 18 percent of Republicans shared links to fake news sites, compared to less than 4 percent of Democrats."

Yes, because "fake news" was defined as 21 specific web sites chosen by BuzzFeed.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

old misogynists sharing "wikileaks CONFIRMS hillary sold weapons to ISIS!!!!" being fake news is absolutely a far-left take on reality, hahaha. how are you so bad at this.

I do disagree with the lazy "Buzzfeed is left wing therefore your result are automatically invalid" conclusion of the poster. :) But I do believe that bias could be a genuine concern here. Both the Buzzfeed article and the Stanford article ( https://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/fakenews.pdf ) seems to focus strictly on political fake news. But Donald Trump fake news is not the only fake news out there. Given t…

The point I made was not that Buzzfeed is left-wing as a reason for doubting it as a source for objective classifications, Le Monde is left-wing as well as reputable and likewise is Heterodox academy, but that rigor is needed in your definition of fake news and that the classification should be statistically controlled for political bias. Buzzfeed seems like a rather odd source if you seek to achieve those goals.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#325
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, maybe in the US. Come to Germany and I'll show you the snorefest of the news media here.

I'm a yankee and I like the boring, straightforward take the Germans have wrt news. I've recently added DW.com to my regular news scan, joining the BBC and the trad USA outlets (AP, Reuters, NPR).

Quite a few years ago, someone at The Economist pointed out that you should pay attention to what went on in the US because it would get around to the UK/Europe in about 15 years.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a link to the source used to classify some news as fake and other news as real in this paper? How do we know liberal cohorts sources are any more reliable? Eg vox and cnn has a similar type of tilt as breutbart and fox. Without validating that the definition does not preclude the conclusion I don’t see how we can trust it’s conclusikn.

Not linked to in the verge article for whatever reason, but you can find the study here: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau4586.full >Posts containing links to external websites are cross-referenced against lists of fake news publishers built by journalists and academics. Here, we mainly use measures constructed by reference to the list by Silverman (7), but in the Supplementary Materials, we show that t…

soundwave106 replied in another message with the sources. Buzzfeed seems to be the primary source of the classifications, a far-left organization, so the conclusion is with all likelihood predetermined by politically motivated definitions of fake news.

These are the classification sources according to soundwave106:

A) The primary source was a list of fake news sites compiled by Buzzfeed Media [1]

B) The study was cross-checked with a list of sites from a peer reviewed paper (H. Allcott, M. Gentzkow, Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. J. Econ. Perspect. 31, 211–236 (2017)) and according to the paper was similar to buzzfeed suggesting an ideological tilt.

There is some additional methodology in the study link.

[1] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/viral-fa...

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#327

This article is a perfect example of the incredibly sloppy and biased thinking that happens in media and which is part of the very problem it talks about. Fake news first and formost is a clickbait scam to get advertising dollars, NOT a political propaganda approach and this tendency to keep using it as if it's an actual political issue is really absurd and itself an example of what is probably more an example of slo…

There is some empirical evidence to suggest that younger generations are better at sussing out opinion vs fact than older generations. Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/10/older... My own pet hypothesis for the larger phenomenon discussed here is this: Younger generations had schooling that attempted to make them "college ready" and part of that college readiness was understanding how to fin…

Some evidence of what though? What is the actual consequence? This is exactly the problem i have with that articles claims. Not a single attempt at digging in just a rush to make it about Trump. There is zero evidence that them spreading more fake news have any actual measurable effect beyond the fact that they spread more. Thats not how conclusions are made like those the articly tries to make.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#329
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad was similar, but he thought it was all a joke. He thought sites like rense and infowars were today's equivalent of the counterculture political satire from when he was young. He knew there were people on those sites who weren't in on the joke, and people with mental illness, but I think he thought it was maybe 5% or 10%, and it just added to the fun for him. He got reverse-pwned by Poe's Law. Yet still he foun…

I'm pretty sure /r/the_donald started out as a joke and slowly turned real at some point. I still don't quite understand what happened. It would make an interesting investigation.

Same with 4chan, from what I've heard.

There's a lesson here about social media: if you tolerate people pretending to be Nazis "as a joke", then you will soon become overrun with actual Nazis.

Re: People older than 65 share the most fake news, a new study finds

#330
post #317
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fox isn't the first, nor is it the only one, especially outside of the US. The UK tabloids have operated a lot like that for pretty much their entire existence, peddling misinformation and moral panics like they're going out of fashion. Hell, the Daily Mail even had a song written about it cause of that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI It's also pretty prevalent on the radio, and has a fair few historical…

New York Daily News, Daily Mail or UK tabloids are not considered legitimate journalism. They are yellow trash, tabloid journalism, also known as rag newspapers. They belong to the same category as Infowars.

They're also the most popular media/'news' outlets in the country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_Unit...

The Mail's website is also the most visited English language news site in the world.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150418010133/http://www.ft.com...

Depressing? Certainly. Puts a damper on the idea that most people got their news from realiable sources before the internet? Yep.

Post reply on HN