I agree with you, but I’m curious to know your thoughts: What do you do when the 2-3% of people who are willing to take that fight head-on aren’t nearly enough to combat the endless bots and astroturfers across social media? I don’t count myself amongst those 2-3% by the way, I’m on Lemmy and not Reddit in part to avoid some of that. Engaging is far too much effort and I have my own problems to worry about.
Comment on Europe gives Elon Musk 24 hours to respond about Israel-Hamas war misinformation and violence on X
erranto@lemmy.world 8 months ago
As much as I hate disinformation on the internet and witnessed what it can do to people. I am very cautious when governments place themselves as the arbiters of truth. we should fight for the freedom of speech even when it is contrary to our beliefs. disinformation should be fraught against with facts and transparency.
cjsolx@lemmy.world 8 months ago
erranto@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It’s about making choices really. you could either take everything and do your best to sieve through the huge amount of disinformation everywhere even if it takes too much time and even risks. or chose a “good-willing good-intending” governments and mass media apparatus to be your main source of information and final arbiter of truth.
In both choices you will encounter disinformation, bias, and propaganda, except in the last one you will only be presented with one version of the events, that’s why I prefer to have access to all propaganda(s) to choose my poison.
3h5Hne7t1K@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Yes. Exactly. How refreshing to hear.
zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
The government has a process called the courts where they decide on what was the “truth” of the matter. Hell, they’ll even restrict your speech during a trial, jurors included. The trick here is you give power to the people to decide, arguably this is playing out in our school systems as well over books.
Auli@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
Good luck with that doesn’t seem to be working.