12 votes

Social media posts keep repeating Trump's lies — and the way they do it is a problem

14 comments

  1. [11]
    Micycle_the_Bichael Link
    This is just so exhausting. Either media outlets (1) STILL don't get that people suck and are only reading the headlines and need to adjust headlines to better reflect the content of the article,...

    This is just so exhausting. Either media outlets (1) STILL don't get that people suck and are only reading the headlines and need to adjust headlines to better reflect the content of the article, or (2) They do get it and don't care enough to change. One is more malicious than the other, but both are pretty fucking bad.

    7 votes
    1. [6]
      alyaza Link Parent
      honestly? most of them don't care or are so glacial to reflect on their errors in reporting during 2016 and afterwards in general that they might as well not care. the new york times newsroom...

      This is just so exhausting. Either media outlets (1) STILL don't get that people suck and are only reading the headlines and need to adjust headlines to better reflect the content of the article, or (2) They do get it and don't care enough to change. One is more malicious than the other, but both are pretty fucking bad.

      honestly? most of them don't care or are so glacial to reflect on their errors in reporting during 2016 and afterwards in general that they might as well not care. the new york times newsroom still stands behind its reporting on the hillary clinton email scandal even now for example, even though she was basically cleared by the FBI no less than twice, the story was ultimately a nothingburger, and it materially was one of several factors which provided the difference between a tight clinton mandate and donald winning the presidency despite losing the popular vote. newsrooms have completely failed to adapt to the new age of politics that donald seems to be creating, and at this rate, i'm pretty sure they're going to fuck their coverage up royally up in 2020 too.

      6 votes
      1. [5]
        moocow1452 Link Parent
        I'd imagine that a lot of it boils down to Donald Trump's sells papers, and in a world where Paper Journalism is losing out to TV Journalism, TV Journalism is losing out to Reality TV, and they...

        I'd imagine that a lot of it boils down to Donald Trump's sells papers, and in a world where Paper Journalism is losing out to TV Journalism, TV Journalism is losing out to Reality TV, and they are all fighting the soul consuming void that is Facebook, anything that can sell news will be used to sell news.

        4 votes
        1. [3]
          nic Link Parent
          So we are the underlying problem? I prefer blaming someone else, if you don't mind.

          So we are the underlying problem?

          I prefer blaming someone else, if you don't mind.

          1 vote
          1. [2]
            moocow1452 Link Parent
            That's fair, I guess. On a macro level, we're all each other's problem, but that also means everything can be somebody else's problem.

            That's fair, I guess. On a macro level, we're all each other's problem, but that also means everything can be somebody else's problem.

            1. nic Link Parent
              I knew I was misanthropic for a reason. Now if only I could understand what you just said.

              I knew I was misanthropic for a reason. Now if only I could understand what you just said.

        2. Pilgrim Link Parent
          This is the right answer. News exists to sell ads.

          This is the right answer. News exists to sell ads.

          1 vote
    2. [4]
      MrGrey Link Parent
      Where's the reward? More effort is required to determine some level of true/false and refute it. More risk is assumed by making the claim and will lead to some sort of backlash from at least...

      Where's the reward?

      More effort is required to determine some level of true/false and refute it. More risk is assumed by making the claim and will lead to some sort of backlash from at least hyper-partisan types. If analyzing the 'truthiness' of the quote is longer than the original quote, the type of people that most need to read the explanation will not do so.

      The very nature of social media is more and faster. Rarely if ever have I found a concept where those two concepts also bring along better/in-depth/quality with them.

      1. [3]
        Micycle_the_Bichael Link Parent
        Idk, I personally would say “Doing your job correctly, not further leading the world into darkness, and writing the actual news and not a lie” are rewards and if you went into journalism I would...

        Idk, I personally would say “Doing your job correctly, not further leading the world into darkness, and writing the actual news and not a lie” are rewards and if you went into journalism I would hope would be things you care about.

        1. Pilgrim Link Parent
          Yes, because the problem is journalists just don't want to do their jobs well. It has nothing to do with capitalism or how we consume news, or anything like that. Just lazy, bad journalists. In...

          Yes, because the problem is journalists just don't want to do their jobs well. It has nothing to do with capitalism or how we consume news, or anything like that. Just lazy, bad journalists.

          In case you didn't know, journalists, especially local journalists, are paid terribly little.

          I recall getting $30 to drive an hour, sit through a two hour meetings, drive back, and then spend an hour writing that story. When I took a job in IT, my starting salary was more than what my prior editor made. That paper later did away with all of their local journalists to further cut costs.

          If you want highfalutin morals guiding your news coverage then be prepared to pay for it. People want news, for free, instantly and they get it.

          3 votes
        2. MrGrey Link Parent
          The larger point is systematic forces determine the broad strokes of the outcome. You end up getting more of what you incentivize and less of what is de-incentivized. The internet has effectively...

          The larger point is systematic forces determine the broad strokes of the outcome. You end up getting more of what you incentivize and less of what is de-incentivized. The internet has effectively monetized rubbernecking first and often little else. It's more cost effective to mass produce drivel and more rewarding to the producer as the drivel draws more eyes. Change that pattern and the rest will follow. Attempting to get a different result from a system that monetarily rewards a separate outcome is a sure way to fail.

  2. [2]
    9000 Link
    So, there seems to be a pretty glaring mistake in this article: When both the graphic and study clearly say that they did not refute the false statement 65% of the time, and only refuted it 35% of...

    So, there seems to be a pretty glaring mistake in this article:

    Of all the tweets about Trump's statements, 30 percent referenced something he said that was false and misleading. Of those tweets, 35 percent did not refute the false statement.

    When both the graphic and study clearly say that they did not refute the false statement 65% of the time, and only refuted it 35% of the time. They switched their numbers. That's... pretty bad actually.

    1 vote
    1. nic Link Parent
      Especially tragic given the nature of the article. I read the comments of the yahoo news article, to see if anyone had noticed this error, and will now try never to read comments from yahoo news...

      Especially tragic given the nature of the article.

      I read the comments of the yahoo news article, to see if anyone had noticed this error, and will now try never to read comments from yahoo news articles ever again.

      3 votes
  3. Somebody Link
    It sounds like the author wants the media to editorialize and sensationalize the headlines to support their viewpoints.

    It sounds like the author wants the media to editorialize and sensationalize the headlines to support their viewpoints.