Misinformation on Reddit has become profitable, so the people who could manage it don't want to.
FTFY
Seriously, just look at the bullshit response the admins gave to all the calls to ban antivax propaganda.
this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2021
29 points (91.4% liked)
Technology
38828 readers
236 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
And despite all that, Reddit's revenue is negligible compared to other social media gaints.
That's also why a lot of the "reddit blackout protests" literally don't do anything. Moderators think that by shutting down their sub to hurt the ad revenue of Reddit, but that's really NEVER been effective.
I'm glad this isn't a thing on the subreddit I moderate..
be sure to use masstagger to make sure there really isn't any misinformation, right-wingers can be surprisingly sneaky
You really cant determine if something is misinformation simply by looking who posted it. Right-wingers also get things right sometimes, just like left-wingers arent always correct.
lol I'm tagged as a /r/conspiracy user. Shouldn't have argued against some nutjobs over there, I feel dirty now.
Masstagger really needs an update. IIRC, they did not update the list of right-wing subreddits.
yeah, a update that accounts for off-shore websites would also be welcome
That would be almost impossible to do I think but yeah a lot of new right wing subreddits or their allies aren't tagged, the list hasn't been updated for a long time.
Facebook have the same issue to be honest. Misinformation is ripe on all social medias. But there is a fine line between censoring misinformation and censoring a certain facet of information, because who is to say what misinformation is?
An example is the censorship of ivermectin. There are a number of studies which show that ivermectin COULD be good against covid-19, yet its being labelled as misinformation. Here is an example of one such study which is a randomized double blind placebo controlled which uses invermectin with doxycycline. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03000605211013550 and concluded that "Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection treated with ivermectin plus doxycycline recovered earlier, were less likely to progress to more serious disease, and were more likely to be COVID-19 negative by RT-PCR on day 14."
But there does need to be more studies into ivermectin to reach a definitive conclusion on if it is actually effective against covid-19.
ffs... https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678
Please, have a listen to https://bodyofevidence.ca/interview-jack-lawrence-and-gid-m-k-on-ivermectin
Simply on the face of it, the notion that an anti-parasitic is useful against virii is not credulous. But hey, what does the body of evidence on it say so far?
Just get vaccinated. That's the medicine that's proven to help. If you catch COVID, you'd better hope you've been vaccinated.
A vaccine is completely different from a medicine. Even people who are vaccinated can get a severe infection, and then its good to have something that helps their treatment. Whether ivermectin is good for that or not I dont know, but I dont think we should automatically dismiss it because others took it too far.
Vaccination is not a full solution on its own. It is impossible to achieve 100% vaccination, so its good to have a treatment that helps those infected. Not to mention that vaccinated people can also get infected.
Right, the point of "just get vaccinated" is the first step that many that are seeking alternate medications for their possible infection are missing.
If we want to avoid misinformation, then perhaps all non-medical experts should stop discussing hearsay nonsense like Ivermectin as if our consensus on the topic would mean anything medically.
What medication should someone take when they get infected with COVID-19? The one their doctor or medical professional tells them to take. That's it.
The article you linked,
-
It doesn't mention or reference the Mehmud article.
-
It doesn't conclude that ivermectin is not useful against covid.
-
It uses the word infodemic.
Did you read it at all?
Overall, your comment does nothing at all to refute @[email protected]'s one.
You completely missed the point and information presented. Sorry you can't grok it.
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.
There are many thousands of substances being tested as COVID treatments. There are dedicated forums to discuss research.
Trying to stir up conversations about a random substance in random forums creates a false impression of importance and legitimacy. This is an example of misinformation.
Can you name any such forums to discuss research?