The discussion of misinformation, “junk news,” and bots have been going around a lot, as have the notions of what journalists can and should be doing to fact-check these things. To that end, here’s a thread for thought from Justin Ling about how this can be working against us in the longer term:
1. Is it being widely shared?
2. Does it say something specific about a foreign adversary's goals?
3. Does it expose a fundamental weakness in our regulations or how technology is run?Even still, there's probably a few stories I wouldn't've published, in hindsight.
— Justin Ling (Has Left) (@Justin_Ling) August 13, 2019
I think we're also mythologizing the role of 3rd party advertisers. Their impact is unknown, but their activities are regulated.
And the new fetish for fact-checks, industry-wide, has set up election coverage that seems to be following social trends, not news or policy.
— Justin Ling (Has Left) (@Justin_Ling) August 13, 2019
So all to say, I think we need to sit back and take stock of our priorities. Can you imagine if a major outlet had a dedicated election healthcare unit? Or if a smaller outlet decided to devote 80% of their time covering climate policies?
— Justin Ling (Has Left) (@Justin_Ling) August 13, 2019
Sorry, earlier tweet should've read that there's no guarantee that disinfo/fake news would be part of a foreign adversary's strategy.
— Justin Ling (Has Left) (@Justin_Ling) August 13, 2019
And national security expert Stephanie Carvin adds a few thoughts of her own, to contextualize the problem:
https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1161424183185854464
https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1161424186214158336
https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1161424188500058112
https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1161424197408702465
Chris Selley. meanwhile, respectfully suggests that if the government is so worried about online misinformation, that they stop pushing it themselves with their own particular bits of spin and torque that plant the same kind of false notions and expectations in people’s minds – and he’s absolutely correct.