Re:YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
by raxxorrax on Thursday October 15, 2020 @05:28AM
(#24786618)
I disagree. Youtube being the authority on information is as far removed from democracy as you could be.
The reaction is based on unsubstantiated axioms. Does COVID-misinformation do significant damage? I don't think so. Are there concrete examples?
Information gets censored, while simultaneously political information gets censored on Twitter because it implicates a presidential candidate. The reason is that it is information obtained by a hack. Good for democracy? A form of government where voters should hold representatives accountable? This is not a Trump endorsement but I feel driven to state the fact.
> Truth, facts, and hoping that people can apply logic to find their way to them isn't enough anymore and the people exploiting this advantage are getting better at it.
Again, I don't think so, are there concrete examples where this happened? And if so, an advertising company which has some easy ways to distinguish itself by removing unpopular opinions (yes, they are actually unpopular)? It doesn't really make sense to me in any way.
Who are these manipulators? Putin? Trump? Cambridge Analytica? Communists? Capitalists?
Where do we actually see dangerous misinformation? The worst decisions are made from fear and I believe your point of view adds to panic reactions.
> say whatever we want, regardless of our status or wealth. This has been corrupted.
Who do you think would would be able to speak freely if you put constraints here. It won't be low status or low income people.
Disinformation on the internet is not a real threat. Not even compared to Nigerian prince scammers. Not having a authoritative voice might look scary, but it is actually a good development. Otherwise I would suggest church or something with more rigid believe systems.
The reaction is based on unsubstantiated axioms. Does COVID-misinformation do significant damage? I don't think so. Are there concrete examples?
Information gets censored, while simultaneously political information gets censored on Twitter because it implicates a presidential candidate. The reason is that it is information obtained by a hack. Good for democracy? A form of government where voters should hold representatives accountable? This is not a Trump endorsement but I feel driven to state the fact.
> Truth, facts, and hoping that people can apply logic to find their way to them isn't enough anymore and the people exploiting this advantage are getting better at it.
Again, I don't think so, are there concrete examples where this happened? And if so, an advertising company which has some easy ways to distinguish itself by removing unpopular opinions (yes, they are actually unpopular)? It doesn't really make sense to me in any way.
Who are these manipulators? Putin? Trump? Cambridge Analytica? Communists? Capitalists?
Where do we actually see dangerous misinformation? The worst decisions are made from fear and I believe your point of view adds to panic reactions.
> say whatever we want, regardless of our status or wealth. This has been corrupted.
Who do you think would would be able to speak freely if you put constraints here. It won't be low status or low income people.
Disinformation on the internet is not a real threat. Not even compared to Nigerian prince scammers. Not having a authoritative voice might look scary, but it is actually a good development. Otherwise I would suggest church or something with more rigid believe systems.