Re:The Slow Death of Authenticity in an Attention Economy
by unglaublich on Friday October 27, 2023 @09:53AM
(#38038430)
> it amplifies for you whatever you already believe.
And specifically the things you hate, because that's what people click-'n-view.
Re:The Slow Death of Authenticity in an Attention Economy
by littlestymaar on Friday October 27, 2023 @09:58AM
(#38038490)
They are just repeating Elon's claims that Twitter was actively doing "woke propaganda". It's not worth your time, really.
Re:The Slow Death of Authenticity in an Attention Economy
by passion__desire on Friday October 27, 2023 @11:28AM
(#38039764)
Community Notes corrects for atleast factual claims right away. I have seen it on ads of products where the product is free and the Community Notes said the product is free only for a week. Here's a thing about fake outrage, for an outrage to be effective the opinion expressed in the tweet multiples the fact vector by a million, but community notes effectively deflates the opinion if it tries to do that. A person getting community noted, in my mind at least, means is ill-informed and not to be trusted.
Re:The Slow Death of Authenticity in an Attention Economy
by ceejayoz on Friday October 27, 2023 @12:27PM
(#38040585)
> Community Notes corrects for atleast factual claims right away.
No, it doesn't. It's vote-based; enough people have to vote that it's a helpful vote for it to appear. That can take hours/days/weeks.
Re:The Slow Death of Authenticity in an Attention Economy
by passion__desire on Friday October 27, 2023 @12:48PM
(#38040830)
It's not opinion or votes all the way down. The corrections have to be referenced. So if someone is misrepresenting a fact, it will be community noted and votes will accumulate as all that remains to do is verify the referenced source.
Re:The Slow Death of Authenticity in an Attention Economy
by ceejayoz on Friday October 27, 2023 @03:04PM
(#38042555)
> It's not opinion or votes all the way down.
It really is. An unreferenced note may be voted up; a well-referenced one may not. There's certainly no requirement you even click the references to see if they say what's claimed. A misrepresented fact may be noted, and it's certainly not synchronous.
I think that an important thing to understand is that social media generally doesn't project a single bias. It is more dangerous: it creates bubbles that encompass groups of people and then mine their minds for attention. This results in polarization, increased rage, and fake outrage, and the like.
So it isn't really helpful to complain that Twitter is leftwing or rightwing etc.; it amplifies for you whatever you already believe. Even though we can generally accept that people's minds don't really change on big issues (whether online or in person), one big problem with social media is that it disincentives listening to each other. "Distincentivze" is perhaps euphimistic - it puts up hard to penetrate walls between us. We don't listen to each other, even if the other person has a worldview or conviction that we detest.