... Okay, that might come off as a bit unnecessarily sarcastic. I actually sort of like the points this article makes about how our reputations are supposed to act as a check on the bad information we spread, and how social media and its different norms about reputation and endorsements have made that check less useful. Attempting to correct that by thinking of new ways to force people to put their own reputations on the line and consider what we know about others' reputations is a worthwhile goal, and there certainly are systems that can help us do that if we're willing to use them.
However, this article doesn't really acknowledge the declining trust people have in sources of information outside their own circles. That's the other reason - arguably the bigger reason - why accusations of fake news have become so common, and trying to spread more fact checking isn't going to help with that part unless the organizations controlling it are trusted by both sides. There aren't any organizations I can think of that would fit the bill, unfortunately.
In the end, such a system would almost certainly end up either being exploited by whichever faction made up the majority of its users, chasing acceptability at the expense of ignoring partisan falsehoods, or trying to be honest and complete and becoming hated by one side or the other for rightfully denouncing their lies. I certainly think we should try to have such things - eventually I think we'll figure out how to make one that actually can earn everyone's trust - but it's not going to be quick or easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment