Europe IV: The Final Hour

[MartyG]

See the PDF I linked above - research done by Oxford University's Computational Propaganda Research Project suggests that fake news on Twitter has declined in 2019 compared to 2017.

And see Figure 5 in the doc - this shows the most shared fake news stories - the highest shared fakes are actually anti Tory (coming from https://evolvepolitics.com/), suggesting Labour bots/astroturfers are more active.

[Dogg Thang]

See the PDF I linked above - research done by Oxford University's Computational Propaganda Research Project suggests that fake news on Twitter has declined in 2019 compared to 2017.

And it's a fairly huge drop too, if the figures are correct (I read the article, not the full report yet).

It does note, and this makes sense, that the false stories are the ones that provoke the most extreme reactions and that, as Asura also alluded to, is a problem beyond politics. It has been a Twitter problem, a Facebook problem, Youtube and probably a whole bunch of other places. The more extreme reactions are louder (even if technically smaller) and can get bumped up easily. We have a media literacy problem but also just a plain media problem.

[MartyG]

One interesting stat in the doc shows that fake news is more likely to contain an image than a professional news link, but video is higher in pro news than fake, which I suppose makes some sense.

[Asura]

And it's a fairly huge drop too, if the figures are correct (I read the article, not the full report yet).

It does note, and this makes sense, that the false stories are the ones that provoke the most extreme reactions and that, as Asura also alluded to, is a problem beyond politics. It has been a Twitter problem, a Facebook problem, Youtube and probably a whole bunch of other places. The more extreme reactions are louder (even if technically smaller) and can get bumped up easily. We have a media literacy problem but also just a plain media problem.

Part of me wonders if some of this could be alleviated by having a means, on Twitter, to say "I don't like this" and for it to DO SOMETHING.

Right now, the only way to respond on Twitter is either with a like or a comment. You can "not respond", of course, but I think we've fully uncovered the non-revelation that humanity isn't good at that, and it doesn't convey the same as a negative response. Of course, I fully know this is open to abuse.

It has to have some effect, also. YouTube's community was rocked by a revelation earlier this year that dislikes don't actually do what people thought; they just get recorded as "engagement" so they're pretty much as good as likes.

[Dogg Thang]

I'm veering off a little bit here but an article popped into my inbox through google alerts and one line struck me as interesting. The article is about media literacy and the headline states that 86% of American 15-year-olds can't tell fact from opinion based on a study. The line that jumped out was: "Respondents who were least able to correctly flag opinions were likely to be digitally unsophisticated, relatively politically unaware and generally mistrustful of the media." https://bigthink.com/mind-brain/opin...1#rebelltitem1

Some years ago, I would have said that a mistrust of the media was just healthy cynicism and would lead to better fact-checking and, as a result, better media literacy in a person. And it seems now that I would have been wrong for many people. It instead allows an easy way to dismiss actual news stories, prop up conspiracy theories, wave away any Occam's razor explanations and help spread misinformation, hence Trump's fake news narrative. It's obviously relevant here. It feels to me like even our mainstream media needs a cleanup (and certainly tabloids) but it's a tricky narrative that might not always serve the right cause.

We live in very messy times.

[Neon Ignition]

It's like this, not helping the case against corrupt Tories at all:

[Mayhem]

Yes, I had spotted the same copy posted on Twitter and FB in my feeds re disputing the four year old boy story.

650/650

And here was me thinking I'd win the contest here with 636/650! Hopefully he's get voted the **** out given how strong the LD are around here...

[Shoju]

I prefer to learn about the party policies from a reasoned and if possible neutral source. I don't take much notice of biased sources who've clearly got an axe to grind with one of the sides like the Guardian or the Mail.

What I expect would happen if the Labour party won is what's described here

https://twitter.com/martinwolf_/status/1200053324915105797

Martin Wolf is not a fan of the Tories by any stretch.
They'd be a disaster and would only create a more equal society by making everyone poorer. The Marxists in the party need to be cleared out so that there can be a viable Labour alternative. It shouldn't be a two horse race anyway.

[Dogg Thang]

I prefer to learn about the party policies from a reasoned and if possible neutral source.

Alan down the pub.

[Cassius_Smoke]

My mother in law is voting Tory because 'get brexit done'. I am despair.

[Asura]

What I expect would happen if the Labour party won is what's described here

https://twitter.com/martinwolf_/status/1200053324915105797

Martin Wolf is not a fan of the Tories by any stretch.
They'd be a disaster and would only create a more equal society by making everyone poorer. The Marxists in the party need to be cleared out so that there can be a viable Labour alternative. It shouldn't be a two horse race anyway.

I'm not sure it'd be any better voting Tory though; as always, both options are bad. You pick the wrong that's more right.

[Cepp]

The Coalition for Reform in Political Advertising has called for all political advertising to be subject to fact-checking as a legal requirement following what it describes as a "fake news and disinformation general election".

It found that for the Conservatives, 88 per cent (5,952) of the party’s most widely promoted ads either featured claims which had been flagged by independent fact-checking organisations as not correct or not entirely correct.

For the Lib Dems, it said hundreds of potentially misleading ads had featured identical unlabelled graphs, with no indication of the source data, to claim it was the only party that could beat either Labour, the Conservatives or the SNP “in seats like yours”

It could not find any misleading claims in ads run by Labour over the period.

Throw in all of these so called 'journalists' spreading false garbage without doing any kind of fact checking and it paints a pretty grim picture.

The person that created the conspiracy theory regarding the boy on the hospital floor was hacked apparently

[Dogg Thang]

Yep, it’s like one option you break a nail and the other you walk through shards of glass until every piece of flesh is hanging from your body. Can’t win either way.

[Cepp]

I prefer to learn about the party policies from a reasoned and if possible neutral source. I don't take much notice of biased sources who've clearly got an axe to grind with one of the sides like the Guardian or the Mail.

What I expect would happen if the Labour party won is what's described here

https://twitter.com/martinwolf_/status/1200053324915105797

Martin Wolf is not a fan of the Tories by any stretch.
They'd be a disaster and would only create a more equal society by making everyone poorer. The Marxists in the party need to be cleared out so that there can be a viable Labour alternative. It shouldn't be a two horse race anyway.

I read that article, and I just see a man who's content with the status quo. He acknowledges the suffering going on but isn't willing to vote to do something about it.

I like his framing by the way. 'Hard left', 'Venezuela', doubting their (Corbyn's) 'commitment to democracy'... Come on, Johnson tried to force Brexit through by proroguing parliament ffs. I've never seen such a flagrant disregard for British democrocy before this government came into power.

Also, I'll take rail nationalisation over catching another First Northern train any day of the week.

[prinnysquad]

I’ve read that Martin Wolf article. It’s generally a lazy mish mash of random thoughts that presents no alternative. It mentions the support for Labour’s economic plans by economists, but utterly fails to refute their points in any meaningful way. I agree with some of his points. But the tone is sneering and condescending. We’ve had 30 years of neo-con trickle-down economics nonsense. It hasn’t worked.