What's The Solution To Misinformation?

[Guest]

Just now, Chekhov said:

If this thread is in any way about Covid "misinformation" (and it was mentioned twice in the opener) then people should be allowed to reply talking about, err, Covid misinformation......

I cannot think you fail to see the inconsistency here.....

You do understand the concept of spotting a subject worthy of discussion and, because it's a bit of a tangent, starting a new thread about it, right?  And then, in that new thread, explaining for context what it was that prompted the new discussion?

 

No one is stopping you talking about this. Just don't post the data you've already presented ad nauseum elsewhere and encourage discussion of that same data in yet another thread.

[trastrick]

Good idea to merge topics that have similar headings. Cuts down the number of number of duplicate postings, gives it a correct timeline sequence of comments.

 

Not sure about eliminating any one subject from being discussed, though, it may be that the subject, like COVID, has proven to be the most controversial example of, in this case, "misinformation", from both sides!

 

When folks tire of a thread, it seems to die out very quickly due to lack of interest.

 

From my experience with blogs,  it is usually those on the losing side of a debate, that get bored with it first! 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by trastrick

[Chekhov]

4 minutes ago, Hecate said:

You do understand the concept of spotting a subject worthy of discussion and, because it's a bit of a tangent, starting a new thread about it, right?  And then, in that new thread, explaining for context what it was that prompted the new discussion?

 

No one is stopping you talking about this. Just don't post the data you've already presented ad nauseum elsewhere and encourage discussion of that same data in yet another thread.

It is unfortunate they have deleted the post, because YOU would then have been able to confirm that is was not the same post, that is just  a smokescreen...... The only thing common to both was the NHS data table, which TBH, I cannot see why it should matter how often that is posted. It's original source data, ironically in view of the subject of this thread.

 

It is worrying that mods appear to be showing bias here.

[SFBeca]

Just now, Chekhov said:

It is worrying that mods appear to be showing bias here.

Wait if I were showing bias wouldn't I be removing all comments I don't agree with on the covid thread? Or is debate encouraged here? 

 

Look clearly you wanted this thread to discuss covid and I've put my foot down and said does the same discussion need to be had on this thread, that is already happening on the covid thread? Sorry it's annoyed you, however this thread has some interesting nuanced discussion that I don't feel is fair to be derailed into another covid only thread. 

[RJRB]

51 minutes ago, top4718 said:

If you really think Google is only giving you info that is 100% "the truth" you really are a lost cause.

Please point me in the right direction.

What sources of information do you consider provide 100%  the truth.

This could be illuminating if you can answer a direct question.

[melthebell]

34 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

So why is the thread allowed when it's about Covid, but we aren't allowed to answer it, err, talking about Covid !

At the very least the opener should be edited to delete all references to Covid, or the thread should be moved to the Covid thread to allow people to answer it.

not really, maybe thats why he started it, but misinformation is everywhere, brexit, trump, 9/11, Q-Anon, as has been said theres a covid thread for covid talks this is about general misinformation, i see you cant grasp the simple things

1 minute ago, RJRB said:

Please point me in the right direction.

What sources of information do you consider provide 100%  the truth.

This could be illuminating if you can answer a direct question.

its funny since other search engines, that apparently dont censor or are more private, actually use google for their search results

[top4718]

1 minute ago, RJRB said:

Please point me in the right direction.

What sources of information do you consider provide 100%  the truth.

This could be illuminating if you can answer a direct question.

I think we've got to the stage where you can virtually believe nothing, the Government are twisting and manipulating stats like you've never known, Whitty (who I wouldn't trust if he said it goes dark at night) stated that hospital admissions had gone up 300% in a week, quite an alarming stat on the surface (not that it was confirmed it was "suggested") but unless you know the actual numbers the percentage means nothing ie 300% of 1 is 4 not earth shattering but he's planted into people like yourself's heads that its a crisis that needs action, blatant manipulation.

 

In this instance you have to look around whatever available sources there are and the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, all you and others do is believe everything that fits the narrative and dismiss everything that doesn't.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

It is unfortunate they have deleted the post, because YOU would then have been able to confirm that is was not the same post, that is just  a smokescreen...... The only thing common to both was the NHS data table, which TBH, I cannot see why it should matter how often that is posted. It's original source data, ironically in view of the subject of this thread.

 

It is worrying that mods appear to be showing bias here.

As I said in the post you replied to, and as SFBecca said in her first post ("I've hidden the comment as it is the same graph as posted on the coronavirus thread yesterday"; I believe that was what she was referring to when she subsequently used the word 'post'), you're reposting data already presented and discussed elsewhere and inviting discussion of it here in a thread that was, and I think I might possibly have mentioned this before, is meant to be about... well, unlike you I'm not going to repeat myself yet again.

 

If there was moderating bias the coronavirus thread/s would be about five pages long.  Get a grip.

[top4718]

13 minutes ago, melthebell said:

not really, maybe thats why he started it, but misinformation is everywhere, brexit, trump, 9/11, Q-Anon, as has been said theres a covid thread for covid talks this is about general misinformation, i see you cant grasp the simple things

its funny since other search engines, that apparently dont censor or are more private, actually use google for their search results

They may do, they probably just don't hide the things they are less inclined for you to see 10 pages in, how many people go much further than the first half dozen headings in a Google search.

[onewheeldave]

49 minutes ago, SFBeca said:

It really isn't. It is me as the Moderator saying keep coronavirus discussions on the coronavirus thread. The graph you just posted was posted yesterday on the coronavirus thread, does it need to be posted here too. 

 

Note not as mod: am I the only one tired of all this coronavirus talk?! It's taking over the Forum it feels! 

From the opening post

On 09/12/2021 at 12:18, Carbuncle said:

The spread of misinformation has been causing a lot of problems recently. Politics in the US would seem to have been polarising in an alarming manner driven by the misperception that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen amongst other things. In regards to covid a small but significant fraction of people would appear to believe that the disease is an order of magnitude less deadly than it actually is ('it's just the sniffles'). An overlapping segment believe that the fantastic covid vaccines that we now have are either very much less effective or very much less safe than they actually are. The consequences of belief in this covid misinformation in terms of death and disease are terrible.

 

 

If you are going to ban talk of covid/measures on this thread, then I fully agree with Chekhov's suggestion here-

43 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

So why is the thread allowed when it's about Covid, but we aren't allowed to answer it, err, talking about Covid !

At the very least the opener should be edited to delete all references to Covid, or the thread should be moved to the Covid thread to allow people to answer it.

As that would remove the problem. Otherwise there is clear bias.

 

8 minutes ago, SFBeca said:

Wait if I were showing bias wouldn't I be removing all comments I don't agree with on the covid thread? Or is debate encouraged here? 

 

 

No. The bias comes from disallowing covid discussion on a thread whose opening post not only mentions it, but is clearly from the orthodox narrative perspective, and, makes a claim that most from the non-orhtodox perspective would dispute heavily i.e. 

 

'The consequences of belief in this covid misinformation in terms of death and disease are terrible.'

 

The bias can be easily removed by editing the reference to covid from the opening post.