I've been considering it for a while and this comment has finally convinced me to write an article about availability bias. Yes, the Twitter files were bad. But using this one example or the other common example of Hunter Biden's laptop, to condemn the vast machinery of information gathering that w…
I've been considering it for a while and this comment has finally convinced me to write an article about availability bias. Yes, the Twitter files were bad. But using this one example or the other common example of Hunter Biden's laptop, to condemn the vast machinery of information gathering that we rely on makes no sense.
It's like flying or shark attacks. Whenever a plane crashes or a shark attacks someone, people are more afraid to fly or go in the sea. The millions of people swimming in the sea incident free, the thousands of people flying safely every day, none of this enters into their calculations. Just the one scary outlier event that is suck in their heads.
Information is similar. We rely on various information sources every day and for the most part they do a great job. Yes, government interference is a reality and a problem. It was also the reality for previous administrations (including Trump's administration, though Musk conveniently chose not to highlight that). In fact, Musk is STILL complying with government takedown requests today. More than Dorsey did. But that doesn't mean we should abandon the whole concept of fact-checking.
To be clear, you're right, fact-checking, like any system, is flawed. Mistakes will be made. Just as, for example, I'm sure the systems that keep child porn and videos of beheadings away from our screens are flawed. I'm just arguing that the solution to these flaws is to make them better and more transparent, instead of doing away with them.
"If you've read about the Twitter files"
I've been considering it for a while and this comment has finally convinced me to write an article about availability bias. Yes, the Twitter files were bad. But using this one example or the other common example of Hunter Biden's laptop, to condemn the vast machinery of information gathering that we rely on makes no sense.
It's like flying or shark attacks. Whenever a plane crashes or a shark attacks someone, people are more afraid to fly or go in the sea. The millions of people swimming in the sea incident free, the thousands of people flying safely every day, none of this enters into their calculations. Just the one scary outlier event that is suck in their heads.
Information is similar. We rely on various information sources every day and for the most part they do a great job. Yes, government interference is a reality and a problem. It was also the reality for previous administrations (including Trump's administration, though Musk conveniently chose not to highlight that). In fact, Musk is STILL complying with government takedown requests today. More than Dorsey did. But that doesn't mean we should abandon the whole concept of fact-checking.
To be clear, you're right, fact-checking, like any system, is flawed. Mistakes will be made. Just as, for example, I'm sure the systems that keep child porn and videos of beheadings away from our screens are flawed. I'm just arguing that the solution to these flaws is to make them better and more transparent, instead of doing away with them.