Seems that alot of folks post twitter people as reliable news sources.Is this o.k? If i wanna read constant twitter bullshit i’d sign up for an account there.Thoughts?
If you don’t want to read it…don’t read it?
Not just about reading it spreading disinformation? example the one about Austria shooting i just reported.
Dangerous territory, I think. Everyone ought to know not to always take things on twitter (or elsewhere) at face value. Healthy scepticism. If posters think something posted is fake news it will generally be challenged in here and that’s more constructive to debate.
Personally, I am of two minds on this. I’d prefer not to provide a forum for disinformation, and would prefer people not post uncorroborated nonsense. But at the same time, ‘fake news’ is a phenomenon of our time, and we should be able to address these attempts at manipulation.
As a meta-point, when the mods moved the forums from TIA to TAN, we did not do so with the intent of making unilateral decisions about things like this. Indeed, one of the features of this new platform is an accumulated reputation that allows the community to take a stronger hand in exactly this kind of role. So, exactly how we balance this is not something we want to simply decide in camera - we would welcome an expression of views on this point.
Sign that ginger…
I think I agree with Kopstar. We’re all adults here and I think on the whole we are able to judge something for ourselves, and anything posted on Twitter as had been said should be taken with a pinch of salt and challenged if incorrect.
I was going to say that perhaps we should filter out the most egregious sources, but then again for example everything Katie Price says is dangerous shite, so isn’t it better to confront that face-on than pretend it doesn’t exist. I don’t think there’s as much value in becoming an echo chamber of sources we already agree with.
The counter point to that is for twitter transfer rumours, there are loads of sources of attention-seeking nonsense we have not allowed to be posted, in order to avoid the time and effort of addressing it.
I think that’s a bit different as there are more identifiable credible sources of transfer information. With general affairs that’s far too wide to have reached a predetermined view as to what’s a reliable source or not (save for the obvious Icke type nonsense).
In my experience posters are pretty good at challenging and scrutinising posts that appear to be propagating bullshit. Of course we’ve all got our own personal leanings but there’s enough of a mix of views in here where issues can benefit from a countering perspective.
It worked okay with TIA and the fake news stuff and even things like holocaust denial were dealt with effectively. Let the community be the guardians with its range of perspectives, as you suggest, otherwise who gets to decide what’s disinformation and what isn’t.
If something is truly disinformation then ultimately it will probably be removed anyway, depending on whether it’s egregious or not. Sometimes it’s best left to be laughed at and ridiculed…otherwise we’d have to ban posting almost anything said by a politician. Then who would I lambast? Adrian would get an even harder time of it from me, poor bloke.
What about the recent twitter post in the us election thread? we’re o.k with that account?
Perfect example of the community self-moderating and making other posters aware of the tweeter’s history that they might not otherwise have been. Now they’ll take that awareness with them when interacting elsewhere, twitter, Facebook, real life etc.
We live in an age were some of the traditional sources of information are increasingly unreliable, biased or show events through a narrow perspective.
I highlighted just the other day the fakenews being peddled by the Telegraph with regards to Covid 19 (articles about being made in china, government conspiracies, lockdowns don’t work, anti mask wearing, downplaying cases and deaths). One step away from lizard people and those blaming 5g.
Instinctively I think all of us now already filter content. But all of us will occasionally make mistakes. We rely on other users to educate and to an extent self moderate (it’s a benifit of a forum)
Posting Twitter links is no different. It is both the best and worst of the news. From direct eye witness accounts, reporters giving their views uncensored, to experts in their field giving their direct insight. It is however prone to reinforcement bias and disinformation. Very real problems of today.
Most people when they make a mistake, say hands up didn’t realize. Thanks for pointing that out (I myself have done that) Debate moves on. Nothing else is needed.
Other times it becomes a debate. Let’s say the perspective Covid19 is man made in China and a plot to take over the west. Over several pages posters go into more detail, debate and become more knowledgeable. That’s s good thing.
It’s pretty rare that a mod needs to step in regards to a tweet. We will if we feel it’s bringing site into disrepute, breaking a law, or a user is not posting in good faith (rare but we have seen it on TIA).
We are actually fairly lucky as despite being small group (400 or so user’s) there is a breadth of knowledge on many subjects that we for the most part disinformation is very low and we self moderate.
I should also point out many times the world is not black or white. The nuance is important. Interpretation is more subjective.
O.K then ya leave yourself open to people posting anything from any dodgy twitter out there,no? An openly hatefull twitter account is deemed acceptable because the poster didn’t bother to check? But you still censor the s…?
Well the s.n is quite clearly a whole different fish kettle. Surprised that you’d attempt to conflate the issue that way, using the s.n as your reductio ad absurdum.
There are other sources that are quite clearly going to be not tolerated but there are others where sometimes the community benefits from the debate that is provoked.
Consider the alternative solutions.
Ban twitter altogether
- Lose breaking events
- Direct insight from experts
Twitter White List
- Lose breaking events for foreign or eye whitness events.
- Requires considerable moderation to ensure people comply. Make too many exceptions and free for all.
Twitter black list/ ban list
- Ongoing manual process of banning sources
- Users don’t know what’s banned till posted (unless going to check list of 100 or 1000+ banned sources)
- Still going to have disinformation coming from other sources.
Twitter is too important today simply to ignore, if posters post a bad link, I don’t think deleting/hiding all associated posts is the best way forward. People don’t learn why. (I for example hand never heard of the twitter account referenced)
One of the key things about having a community, is we are not like Twitter or Facebook. We set our own standards as a community, that is reinforced by the community. That’s why the core 400 people we have today are so important as we grow. They set the tone for everyone else.
My point is "The s… shines now"cannot be read not that people use that as a source,so you can stop things if you want but weird ass dudes/potential right-wingers on twitter can be quoted at will? It just seems to me people are quick to jump on something from twitter and reposting it on here without checking and without a reason as to why they’re using said random twitter dude.How about if people started quoting random folk from rawk or other forums?
Every social media platform, has the same problem.
We are in privileged position that we can self moderate. When needed report button can be used. That makes us better than most platforms.
We understand the problem, but what are you suggesting we do instead ?
See i dunno, i was just offering it up as discusion to see what other people thought about it or if it was an issue.Maybe stop the posting of unsubstantiated twitter links in news type threads? i still don’t think the stuff about the austrian shooting is a good look for the forum.
Nah; I live my life perfectly fine without it.
Not what people are saying on twitter