The Fix for Fake News? Give us Tools, not Censorship.
Restrictions on free speech are all the craze now in Western Democracies (Demockrazies?). In the US, we’ve got the various “protect the people from fake news” initiatives. Of course, the self-appointed and designated “protectors” are Corporate and Government entities, mixed with billionaires who think they are as good and wise as Buddha, Solomon, and all the Saints. (Said blessing comes with one’s first billion dollars, apparently.)
Get real: we’re going to get censorship favorable to the interests of The Powers That Be. And certainly not something closer to an informed citizenry in a functioning democracy.
No thanks: you’re not the people I’d trust deciding what I can see and hear.
Instead of top-down “protection” how about all you rich and powerful people do this: sponsor tv, radio, internet, etc spots educating citizens on how public opinion can be manipulated? Public Service Announcements.
For instance: How to spot dishonest and incomplete arguments. The basics of logic, and the tricks of rhetoric. How to verify assertions; or at least tell what you know and what more you need to know. There’s tons of these, written down in books by scholars since the ancient Greeks; all easily portrayed.
There’s one tool. We could have that in practice all over by the end of January, if that were any kind of priority for our censors.
As to social media it seems they are going to put banners on stories with warnings about “fake news” and also just find ways to hurt revenue for sites that they don’t like, or don’t toe whatever is the Official Line of the Day.
Here’s an interesting news item: 6 of 10 people don’t read much past the headline. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/real-problem-6-10-americans-read-...
Well, instead of Anomynistas passing judgement on what is real or fake, why not ask the poster to certify they’ve read the whole thing; that they’ve checked the links within it; that they’ve gone to other sites to verify or refute the claims. Not that they'd have to do any of that; but the absence of such statements at the top might affect how the piece is taken and maybe inspire people to look deeper themselves.
There’s another tool in our hands; more powerful if the proposed education about tricks with words is widespread. I'd imagine there are even more tools (and why isn't 'recognize manipulative language' routinely taught in schools, btw?).
Comments
Yes, I've already been hearing about people getting censored
such as on Facebook. I don't like fake news either, but asking TPTB to police sites and make that determination is asking for trouble. Tools - and teaching people how to make their own determinations - sound like much better solutions.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Thanks Jim P !
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
Step one to counter propaganda: Teach people to think
Unfortunately, that would result in fewer people signing up for wars.
An educated, functioning electorate is far less susceptible to propaganda.
They want people who will believe the "Right" propaganda.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Nailed it, dmw!
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
Indeed
Concise, and to the point.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Brilliant jim p. "News" today is scrolling one's FB headlines...
I've been concerned about this for a long time.
Both the penchant of website editors for creating clickbait titles, which sometimes are purposely deceptive and sometimes have little to do with the actual content of the story, and, the tendency for people scrolling Farcebook and Twitter all day and then saying to one another, "yeah, I saw that" - meaning they only actually saw the headline but in fact never read the actual story (though they think they have, because they "saw that too").
And, then there's the World According to Google. Almost everyone alive thinks if it's not on Google it doesn't exist. Well, I'm not sure people have really thought about the centuries of accumulated written knowledge that existed in the era B.G., which might be around 2005, or whenever they became the monopoly search engine for the world. In other words, there's tons of material they don't have; I'm even inclined to say it may even be an infinitesimal amount compared to the totality of the world's libraries, personal libraries, the papers and research of institutional science and the arts, etc.
I've jettisoned them from my searches and even when looking for maps, which is pretty difficult because all the others suck in comparison.
We're being duped and surveilled, sucked into a vortex that purports free, open and shared knowledge. And there are some aspects that are amazing, such as the fact that we take for granted that anyone can "google" anything to find out how to do the most obscure thing. It's a sign that more people are egalitarian and socialist-minded than they are capitalistic. That bodes well for humanity I think. But one must be prepared and vigilant overall for what is happening. These social media sites, along with email providers and Google, are most likely selling composite sketches of who we are according to our long online search records and reading habits, to everyone from health insurance companies to to lawyers and the police.
Great points and observations as usual, my man. Need more discussions like this.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
Who polices the police/censors the censors?
Now that the cat is out of the bag this is going to be a thorny issue. There have always been fake news and rumors. There is an entire faux cable channel and dozens of talk radio shows dedicated to it. Take a look at the front cover of the National Enquirer when you are checking out. In a post factual world who decides what is fact? It creates a pretty convenient opportunity for a would be totalitarian government. Who censors the censors?
And now for a brief CT, Warning it could be a fake rumor: If you wanted to find an excuse to begin censoring news you could plant fake news which would become a self justifying reason for censorship. It's just another form of a false flag in the form of propaganda.
Same as the GWB State of the Union speech where he conflated, aluminum tubes that we already knew were the cases for small tactical rockets not centrifuges with yellow cake uranium which is harmless in an of itself, and came up with a mushroom cloud over the United States that somehow got here from Iraq. Vola',
off to shock and awe. They are still adding up the costs for what has long since past being the most expensive false new story in the history of the world.
I usually use duckduckgo for searches
Duckduckgo does not track because they are not set up to do it. If I really need more information about something but can wait a few days I google from a library computer.
They keep trying to censor us and track us but people from both ends of the political spectrum are strongly against it. We will need to team up with some strange bedfellows to fight this.
NSA can probably record every computer click I make, but I am not handing over my privacy to corporate oligarchs any more than necessary. I do not want them telling me what to read or think, either.
(P.S. I think that when our computers crash NSA should hand over our backup files. After all they stored them with our tax dollars.)
Besides
If you had to actually read the stories there would be no comments on a certain orange site.
Weren't there Debate classes back in the day?
Which taught people how to spot bad arguments and logic? And of course how to construct good arguments.
One of the best books I ever had which I lost was a compendium of known literary and rhetorical techniques organized by their Latin and Greek names. This is what monks in Europe did on cold winter nights. Very thick book which I am convinced some goper stole from me. Very dangerous book as it listed rhetorical techniques which the monks considered dis-honest.
Education and Information
The most important thing the government can do about MANY things is to educate and inform citizens. Some people love to rush right to banning things, but why not treat people like the adults they are and let them make an informed choice. Whether we're talking about news, drugs both recreational and medicinal or raw milk, why do some people feel the first responsibility of the state is to ban things they don't like? Why not get the government out of the nanny role and into the role of educator and let people make their own choices.
All Facebook need do is fact check and if they can't or won't
then they should put a simple notification under the headline such as -- This news article has not been fact checked, is not verified. It is thereby considered an opinion piece. They could do one better in simply inviting readers to do some fact checking for them, leave a spot for tabulated results to appear before or after the body of the article. Facebook people (I personally loathe Facebook, its one possible saving grace is that it serves as a great tool for families that are separated by long distances to keep in touch) would love to interact this way.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
News?
What is news? How would you define a news article? Are the essays on this site news?
No. Essays are opinion. Either academically cited or casual.
News, as I understand it, is the journalistic reporting of incidents that really and genuinely occur in day to day life. Are you serious? This is a blog site. Sometimes essayist link to sources that are news, sometimes not. For some, including me, it serves from time to time as a news feed.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Yes, I'm Serious
If you read the "news" today, you'll find plenty of opinion. Just look at all of the so-called official news outlets doing nothing but repeating propaganda of one stripe or another. If the absence of opinion is what makes something news, then all modern news is fake news.
Read a story in your local paper about a fire in your area.
If the fire actually happened, then that would be a news story that is not fake news. It will also probably be a straight news story. There are straight news stories about things that actually happened, slanted news stories about things that actually happened and opinion or commentary. Fake news is about things that did not happen. For example, although I am no fan of Hillary Clinton, I'm guessing she is not running a child sex ring. And while we are on the subject of Hillary, the story she herself told about dodging sniper fire was a fake news story.
I have said that myself in here at least once--
I'm as cynical as the next -- nonetheless, not all news is fake news, though we are lucky if some egoist reporter can help but put their little unneeded spin upon it.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Sure they'll try
to censor the internet. Of course they will. But it's not gonna work for them. It's like trying to dam the flow of a river delta -- a futile endeavor, an impossible task, a losing battle.
Even the Herculean efforts of the North Korean State to control the flow of information are destined to ultimately fail sooner or later. Probably sooner, the way things are going.
native
The river will find a way
For instance, sooner or later Old Man River is going to outfox the Army Corps of Engineers (which have been trying to stave off the inevitable for more than half a century), jump his bed, and head down the Atchafalaya. This will be very, very bad news for New Orleans, for the oil industry, and probably for Atchafalaya Basin wildlife (including any surviving ivory-billed woodpeckers, though none have been sighted in the region for many decades).
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
The internet moves
a lot faster than Old Man River, and is not as easily dammed up.
native
Who shall protect us from fake news from government and
politicians? Wouldn't you love to know why Obama got a statute passed that allows the U.S. government to "propagandize" its own citizens? You KNOW that one was not about the U.S. government telling the truth.
Unfake News Flash: No one is going to eliminate fake news, which has been around since the serpent promised Eve she would be like the gods if she ate the forbidden fruit. To test your honesty, people used to ask if you ever told a lie. If you said no, they knew you were dishonest. What they may well do, however, is create a "chilling effect" for freedom of political speech. What is possible and decent, but they probably won't go that route, is educating citizens to be less gullible.