Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_itn73si wrote

Reply to comment by Thunderbutt77 in Experiment finds TikTok, Facebook approve ads pushing election misinformation by thebelsnickle1991

>The reason you don't have time is because it is impossible.

The reason I don't have time is because I have a job.

>Misinformation and Disinformation are used to suppress speech.

In what way? I don't see how calling these things "lies" would suppress speech less.

1

Thunderbutt77 t1_itrsqn2 wrote

Misinformation is used in place of lies because it muddles the definition of a lie and causes a grey area. There is no grey area when it comes to the truth or a lie.

Misinformation is used to suppress speech in this manner. I'm only using this example because it is recent, big, and accurate.

"If you get vaccinated, you can't spread the virus" This was presented as fact, while in reality it was a lie. Anything questioning this lie was classified as "misinformation" and was removed from message boards, social media, etc. We weren't even allowed to ask the question. This suppressed speech.

"If you get vaccinated, you can still spread the virus" - this fact was called misinformation. No one ever said "That is a lie". Why, because it isn't a lie and calling it a lie would come back and bite you on the ass. You can talk your way out of "misinformation" - once you call someone a liar you have liability.

Misinformation... not a lie, but we don't want you talking about it so we're not going to let you. I can't really prove you wrong so I'm just going to shut it down.

Lie... say whatever you want. I'll prove you a liar and show the world.

1

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_itrvpvo wrote

>"If you get vaccinated, you can't spread the virus" This was presented as fact, while in reality it was a lie.

At the time this was said, it was correct to the best of everyone's knowledge. Later it was updated when more data came in about the efficacy of the vaccines.

The flip happened with your second example, of course.

Knowledge is not some static, unchanging thing. If we treat it as such, as you're treating it, no public official or private entity would ever make a hard statement in fear that it may be proved wrong and spun as a lie.

No wonder politicians are so damn wishy washy, because a portion of the population inevitably calls them liars if they turn out to be wrong about something.

1

Thunderbutt77 t1_its472m wrote

Oh my! How dare us call politicians liars when they lie! How about they have an idea of what they are talking about before presenting something as fact? Or, there is the option of saying "We aren't sure, but we're hoping that...". Nah, let's present it as fact and shut down any conversation.

Knowledge and Facts are not the same thing. Did I reference knowledge anywhere? I refer to FACTS. Facts are static, unchanging things. If they weren't they wouldn't be called Facts.

Back on point... Misinformation and Disinformation are bullshit words only used to suppress speech. You asked how, I just showed you how.

You're dug in and that's okay with me. I've proven my point over and over. I've answered your questions with yes and no and given examples.

There isn't one single example of actual mis(or dis)information that I can't call a lie.

1

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_itt363w wrote

>Knowledge and Facts are not the same thing. Did I reference knowledge anywhere?

You referenced the vaccines and whether someone vaccinated could pass the virus along or not. At one time it was believed the person couldn't. Early clinical trials showed this.

Over time it was shown that, actually, vaccinated people can pass along the virus.

Initially what was KNOWN turned out to be different from what is now KNOWN. Knowledge. Facts are learned, and added to our knowledge over time as new data/information is received.

We can't have 100% certainty in everything at all times.

1

Thunderbutt77 t1_itv2f8y wrote

If something is KNOWN then it doesn't change. Otherwise it isn't KNOWN, it is assumed.

There is a thing (used to be anyway) called Scientific Theory. Science, not The Science, just regular old Science. It involves three steps: Testable, Replicable, Stable. What you don't see there is "At one time it was believed...".

Regardless, none of this has anything to do with these two bullshit words being used to suppress speech.

Over on r/News, this is the first comment on a post (by a very objective mod /s):

"Antivaxxers are not welcome in r/news.
If you are spouting misinformation about COVID-19, vaccines, or even
just general antivax talking points, you will be permanently banned.
Consider this your warning."

Do you know why that says "If you are spouting misinformation" rather than "If you are spouting lies"? It is because they can call whatever they want misinformation without having to prove anything.

If it said "Lies", then a banned user would be able to say "Please show me how I'm lying". This requires proof.

Since it says "Misinformation", a banned used must say "Please show me how I'm wrong" and Mod can say "I'M NOT DOING THIS WITH YOU FASCIST" and move on. No proof required. Your thoughts are bad and we will not let you share them.

That's why you are unable to find any example of misinformation to which I can't respond with "That is a lie".

Misinformation and Disinformation are words only used to suppress speech.

1

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_itvixz5 wrote

>It involves three steps: Testable, Replicable, Stable. What you don't see there is "At one time it was believed...".

I'm well aware of the scientific method. Dozens of science courses taken during college. Apparently you aren't, considering our understanding of literally everything has been constantly refined over the centuries since it was conceived.

Hypotheses are formed, tested profusely, and occasionally found to be incorrect or improved on in the future. Outside of math there is very little we still believe to be true today that was believed even decades ago, let alone centuries.

What do you figure, we should put an asterisk on every statement ever made?

"*May be proved incorrect in the future, and some dumbfuck on reddit might call it a lie"

1

Thunderbutt77 t1_itvn6mf wrote

Dumbfuck, huh? I'm absolutely kicking your ass on an intellectual level. You've got NOTHING for me.

You aren't able to provide a single example to support your stance. Not one. As a matter of fact, you haven't even addressed a single point I've made. You just make excuse after excuse.

"Yeah, but at that time, to the best of our knowledge, blah blah"

I have dismantled your argument over and over and over. You're so beaten on the topic of mis and disinformation that you've moved on now.

And no, we don't need an asterisk on every statement ever made. I understand you are feeling embarrassed and are now lashing out and calling names but this is just a dumb thing to say even when you are mad. If, however, something is presented as a medical fact and there is even an infinitesimal chance that it is wrong, yeah, I think it should include a disclaimer. Every FDA approved medicine has a ton of them.

1

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_itvse8a wrote

Hmm, an example. How about Newton's laws? Those are mostly correct, until they aren't. Was Newton lying when he came up with his theories?

How about quantum mechanics? That changed our thinking on just how small elements of matter are, and the lack of predictability of the universe.

More recently, how about climate science? Early on we thought the ice caps were going to be melted by now. Turns out they were off by a number of decades. Even now there are huge error bars on the predicted sea level rise by 2100, and it changes every year.

>If, however, something is presented as a medical fact and there is even an infinitesimal chance that it is wrong, yeah, I think it should include a disclaimer. Every FDA approved medicine has a ton of them.

This I agree with. But the point I was trying to make is that would include everything. Why are there disclaimers for every FDA approved medicine? Because we never know for sure. Clinical studies are great but they never tell the whole story.

Maybe there should've been a disclaimer of some kind on the statement that vaccinated people can't spread the virus. But from my perspective, that asterisk is always there.

1

Thunderbutt77 t1_itwhoi0 wrote

I seriously don't even know where you are going with this. You are trying so hard to be right about something. I don't wish to discuss vaccines and science with you. We were discussing misinformation; the example I used to show how the words misinformation and disinformation are used to suppress speech just happened to be about the vaccines. Stay on topic.

Yes, in the history of the world there have been scientific discoveries that have changed scientific definitions. You are correct! Usually they don't happen in the course of 6 months and usually they don't involve the government forcing the population to take a drug, but in the history of science it has happened. Isn't it cool how I can directly address your statement?

Now, back to the topic that you so greatly want to avoid. I want an example on THIS:

Misinformation and Disinformation are bullshit words used only to suppress speech.

There is no example of actual misinformation that I can't call a lie.

1

Thunderbutt77 t1_iu56vgj wrote

This is how you silence people. Facts and logic.

No need to ban anyone when you can prove you are right.

This was a good exchange.

1