Misinformation flooding some of Alberta’s biggest online communities has become a major problem during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to three volunteer moderators of Edmonton communities on Reddit, a social media and news aggregator website.
Agreed, and I’m sorry that you are being downvoted.
Social media and news media have a huge incentive to promote information that results in increased user interaction.
Ultimately no single organization or individual can be blindly regarded as arbiters of truth. We know this. When ideas can’t be independently verified, thankfully, tools such as critical analysis and debate exist to tackle conundrums when they arise. It’s a struggle.
Rules of the game unfortunately change when crises occur. Covid-19 is just one of countless instances. People who usually reason rationally become susceptible to flawed thinking in an effort to make sense of and resolve troubling things.
The pendulum truly does swing both ways; the blind, blanket categorizations of ideas contrary to the institutional position is not helpful. The way to combat bad ideas is with good ideas, not with absentminded censorship.
For what it’s worth coming from a stranger on the net, yes: the preponderance of studies on ivermectin are in favor-- indicating efficacy against the disease. The institutional scientific process itself is heavily flawed, this is a bitter truth. In time, truth yearns to come out, and truths have no motive or agenda, they simple are.
Man, it’s like the court of public opinion is worth everything, and scientific consensus, none.
No, there’s a pile of fraud involved in Ivermectin (amongst others) “studies”, and there is no consensus at all that suggests that an anti-parasitic medicine has any effect on COVID whatsoever (what I presume you meant by “the disease”). If that’s what you were trying to say, then you’re part of the misinformation machine. Congrats.
Agreed, and I’m sorry that you are being downvoted. Social media and news media have a huge incentive to promote information that results in increased user interaction.
Ultimately no single organization or individual can be blindly regarded as arbiters of truth. We know this. When ideas can’t be independently verified, thankfully, tools such as critical analysis and debate exist to tackle conundrums when they arise. It’s a struggle.
Rules of the game unfortunately change when crises occur. Covid-19 is just one of countless instances. People who usually reason rationally become susceptible to flawed thinking in an effort to make sense of and resolve troubling things.
The pendulum truly does swing both ways; the blind, blanket categorizations of ideas contrary to the institutional position is not helpful. The way to combat bad ideas is with good ideas, not with absentminded censorship.
For what it’s worth coming from a stranger on the net, yes: the preponderance of studies on ivermectin are in favor-- indicating efficacy against the disease. The institutional scientific process itself is heavily flawed, this is a bitter truth. In time, truth yearns to come out, and truths have no motive or agenda, they simple are.
Man, it’s like the court of public opinion is worth everything, and scientific consensus, none.
No, there’s a pile of fraud involved in Ivermectin (amongst others) “studies”, and there is no consensus at all that suggests that an anti-parasitic medicine has any effect on COVID whatsoever (what I presume you meant by “the disease”). If that’s what you were trying to say, then you’re part of the misinformation machine. Congrats.