- Feb 2022
-
www.wired.com www.wired.com
-
This is not new. But why does the problem persist? To truly understand the challenges and context of “fake news,” it’s important to return to the seminal events of 2016—and to one in particular in which Facebook made precisely the wrong choice, known colloquially in disinformation researcher circles as Conservativegate or Trending Topicsgate.
We need to learn from our prior mistakes. The example of the 2016 election is just that an example. There is misinformation everywhere. As stated this is not new information to us.
-
Researchers are still debating the extent of the impact on the 2016 election.
Misinformation affects more than we would like to admit. For a big historical election year we have people doubting results because of the huge issue of misinformation. Researchers who pay attention to social outcomes from posted media have even noticed a change since the 2016 election.
-
Over the past two years, journalists and researchers have assembled an entire lexicon for describing these problems: misinformation, disinformation, computational propaganda.
There has been a clear set of people aiming to control and help educate the issues of Fake News, Including what is a sub category to it.They have been making an attempt thats been a long process.
-
- Nov 2021
-
www.washingtonpost.com www.washingtonpost.com
-
he figure above shows the percentage of respondents who got news about the coronavirus from each of those sources in the 24 hours before completing our survey.
Wow! Just wow! According to the survey results the second leading source for people receiving information about coronavirus was Facebook. Its amazing how many would by pass an actual news station for a social engagement site. It makes me worry how much more false information they are getting about other events.
-
- Oct 2021
-
www.theatlantic.com www.theatlantic.com
-
oes my name belong to me? Does my face? What about my life? My story? Why is my name used to refer to events I had no hand in? I return to these questions again and again because others continue to profit off my identity, and my trauma, without my consent.
Out of much consideration of the events and the media involvement in this case it reminds me so much of the unfair way media can portray us. Immediately once this case took place the media tore apart her whole life. They dug any and all negative information they could get their hands on about Amanda. Unfortunately this will forever cause her to be connected to this murder even though she was found to be innocents in all realms. She was sentenced without needing to be sentenced by random strangers because the details of the case that weren't even confirmed were being pushed out by media for attention.
-
I am the American girl in that story, and if the Italian authorities had been more competent, I would have been nothing more than a footnote in a tragic story. But as in many wrongful convictions, the authorities formed a theory before the forensic evidence came in, and when that evidence indicated a sole perpetrator, Guede, ego and reputation led them to contort their theory to maintain that I was still somehow involved. Guede was quietly convicted for participating in the murder in a separate fast-track trial, and then I became the main event for eight long years.
I have had little insight on this case before this article. However it always was around. I heard classmates, friends and family talk about it often. I've seen the Netflix documentary pop up on most trending and just have let it slip by since. However, I do have to wonder why the Italian government pointed to the American girl immediately. Is it possible because she was not from their country she was stereotyped not to be trusted? Really makes you think especially when Guede's name was kept hush hush for so long.
-