If not get rid of it, how to decrease it?

  • azuth@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    So any passionate actor is a bad actor. Which is necessary for wrong information to be disinformation according to your definition.

    I will argue that a disinformation campaign could find agents that are able to remain calm and engage in ‘polite’ debate (via training, scripts and other forms of support, perhaps AI can help write some posts/articles etc). Meanwhile ordinary users are more likely to lose their cool when presented with propaganda even if it is well presented.

    I am also going to address you suggesting that I believe most information is “arbitrarily” subjective. I don’t. The issue is that of course we cannot actually apply the scientific method in a lot of cases, including news and politics.

    For example either the US attacked first or Iran did in the most recent case. How would one apply the scientific method to find out? In a lot of cases there is simply not enough data accessible to people.

    Even in science, both physical and especially social ones we have this issue. We don’t really do experiments on whole countries etc.

    I think you are handwaving away the issue. I am sure you know who the bad actors are and what is disinformation.