Tiny number of 'supersharers' spread the majority of fake news

Re:Tiny number of 'supersharers' spread the majority of fake... by jemmyw on Saturday June 01, 2024 @07:45AM (#40544911)

I followed that news story at the time. There was plenty of speculation in the media, but the facts were laid out - there was a lab in the city, they were studying these types of viruses, that type of virus was also present in local wildlife that was traded.

Then it became clear that the Chinese govt wasn't going to investigate or admit if it was a leak, accidental or not. At which point I file as we'll never know + who cares at this point.

And then after that it blew up as a political football in the US. It's not fake news, it's just pointless opinions.

Fake news is saying it was a lab leak, or it wasn't a lab leak. Neither is a true statement. Both are polarising and ill informed positions.

In any case, I don't disagree with your premise that we can be manipulated quite easily.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tiny number of 'supersharers' spread the majority of fake... by throwaway290 on Sunday June 02, 2024 @12:00AM (#40551218)

Saying it was a lab leak, or it wasn't a lab leak is not fake news. It's just an opinion, anyone can have one.

But reputable media reporting on people saying "it may be a lab leak" as conspiracists is manipulation and "fake news". I didn't know it was so widely believed on US left but apparently it was.

> At which point I file as we'll never know + who cares at this point

We just went through a pandemic with pretty bad effects, so... everyone?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tiny number of 'supersharers' spread the majority of fake... by jemmyw on Sunday June 02, 2024 @04:12PM (#40556896)

> so... everyone?

Yes you misunderstood because I worded that badly and glibly. We can't know and the issue is so muddied and we had a lot to deal with. The virus was already out, knowing wouldn't put it back. The best reaction is to reconsider all these labs anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]