this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
1066 points (99.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26661 readers
3088 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DocBlaze@lemmy.world 82 points 1 year ago (2 children)

accurate description of how trashy the media has become

[–] AffineConnection@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Journalism was always like this when it comes to reporting on research.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 20 points 1 year ago

I'd say journalism is always like this when it is profit motivated. There are a couple of factors at play. First, you need to publish your article as fast as possible so no one beats you to the scoop and take views away from your piece. Next, you are incentivized to oversimplify everything to ensure your article appeals to as broad an audience as possible. Finally, you are incentivized to write sensationalist titles to attract attention.

The outcome of this gets gnarly fast. People's first impressions usually color how they forever view the story. For a long time people still believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, even after it was clear that was false. Part of this is psychological, but part of it is that reading the corrections section of the news is boring as hell. I think some of THAT is just human nature of we're fascinated by the novel, and correcting details isn't novel. But also some is that publishers don't want you paying close attention to their fuckups so they bury them. They think it would reduce your trust in them

Next, oversimplifying tends to result in inaccuracies. Its a game of telephone. An expert explains their very best understanding of what's going on to the journalist, simplifying it because the journalist isn't an expert and needs to ask questions to grasp the parts that don't immediately make sense. Depending on the field, even the expert might not have fully solidified their understanding yet. Anyway. The journalist simplifies their understanding of the subject for mass consumption. Generally speaking, the audience can't ask the journalist follow up questions like how the journalist did with the expert, so we've just crossed a territory into which resolving misconceptions is going to be much harder going forward. After that, let's be real, you're probably going to summarize stories you heard to your friends creating further layers of simplification.

Finally, let's be honest with ourselves, we've all read an article title, not read the article, and still retained whatever misleading sensationalist title the author wrote.

[–] Littleborat@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or any topic that you know better than the average person.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is generally what I say about news reporting on any technical topic. Just look at any report on a subject you understand, realise how much they get wrong. Now, assume the same level of accuracy on a subject you don't understand.

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Not just news reporting, but the propagation of information in general, so add in social media and word of mouth in there too. Assume everything you hear or read is wrong, because the majority of info is created from the first peak of a Duning-Kruger chart.

[–] Jumper775@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This sort of thing is why I’m so excited for AI journalism, yes it costs jobs but the quality improvement will be drastic as they won’t get burnt out, can “understand” every topic, and can even produce in multiple languages accurately. We won’t have to worry about this anymore as people won’t have to click on one of say 100 articles written to get people to read when they can choose 1 that is actually interesting of 1000.

[–] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're making a bold assumption that it won't be used to fill the market with countless clickbait trash as a low cost money making machine

[–] Jumper775@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It absolutely will be used to do that, but people can choose where they get their news, so if you put out such a news source people will go to you instead of those sites. This is the good part capitalism.

[–] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That already exists... There are good journalist why do u wanna replace them with ai

[–] Jumper775@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

It’s cheaper and easier to produce more high quality articles if you don’t have to worry about journalists getting burnt out or overworked. This also opens the door for writing the same article in many different languages with analogies and the like tailored for different cultures based on language or even location, as well as even writing it in real time with the specific person in mind so it can be more interesting to them. On top of this it means that you can get stories quicker than everyone else with the same quality as AI is much faster than a human.

[–] MrGeekman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The media has been trashy for ages. You gotta check out a book from the 70's called The Mind Managers by Herbert Schiller.

[–] Cruxifux@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Man when I found out how scientific studies were funded and how much work you had to do to actually understand them after just seeing face value the media throws out I was crestfallen.

Like just how the Koch brothers have funded media projects and twisted the findings ALONE pissed me off to no extent. Everything we are fed has an agenda and it’s horrific.

[–] kwekkie@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Experts say" does not mean that they are experts in the field they are talking about, it also doesn't mean that any research has been done. It just means that they said it, it might even have been a joke.