[oregontim]

This is not about free speech; this is commerce. People are paying platforms for this. This stuff on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter is advertising, not free speech.



And furthermore, misinformation about Covid-19 is a public health issue. The "fire in the theater" analogy applies. Obviously.



What's happened here IMO is that technology has overtaken the ability of our institutions to manage it. And that might explain it, but it doesn't make it any less dangerous.

Pretty sure I'm going to regret this, because, in an echo chamber, the last thing one should do is not be part of the echo.  But, briefly, here goes...



The "fire in the theater" analogy doesn't apply.  Obviously.  The problem with yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is that it isn't so much speech as an action  that causes people to react NOT to the content of the speech but to the exigency of the moment, without any time to consider the truth or accuracy of the content, the identity of the speaker, the existence of opposing views, and a variety of other factors that are plainly NOT present in considering online comments.  If the government started trying to eliminate all "Covid-19 misinformation" on the grounds that it is a "public health issue,"  the First Amendment would be gone [and we'd all be living in a country like the one that apparently cannot be named in this context, according to Sen. Harris].

No, please don't regret it. You make an excellent point. I'm glad you added it. Rebuttals are fine with me when they have substance, like this one does.

---

Meanwhile, back to the post that started this thread, a post in today's Business Insider quotes that same Carnegie Mellon study but with a slightly different spin:

Roughly half of the Twitter accounts pushing to 'reopen America' are bots, researchers found

So it's not just a lot of bots on the topic, but rather a lot of bots taking one side — reopen America — on the topic.

From the BI Story:

The researchers said they found that among tweets about "reopening America," 66% came from accounts that were possibly humans using bot assistants to spread their tweets more widely, while 34% came from bots.

There are a few possible explanations for the surge in bot activity. People may have more time to set up elaborate bot networks during stay-at-home orders, and the availability of botnets for hire has exploded recently. Carley also said that the global nature of the pandemic meant that countries and interest groups were using it to advance political agendas.

[oregontim]

This is not about free speech; this is commerce. People are paying platforms for this. This stuff on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter is advertising, not free speech.



And furthermore, misinformation about Covid-19 is a public health issue. The "fire in the theater" analogy applies. Obviously.



What's happened here IMO is that technology has overtaken the ability of our institutions to manage it. And that might explain it, but it doesn't make it any less dangerous.

Pretty sure I'm going to regret this, because, in an echo chamber, the last thing one should do is not be part of the echo.  But, briefly, here goes...



The "fire in the theater" analogy doesn't apply.  Obviously.  The problem with yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is that it isn't so much speech as an action  that causes people to react NOT to the content of the speech but to the exigency of the moment, without any time to consider the truth or accuracy of the content, the identity of the speaker, the existence of opposing views, and a variety of other factors that are plainly NOT present in considering online comments.  If the government started trying to eliminate all "Covid-19 misinformation" on the grounds that it is a "public health issue,"  the First Amendment would be gone [and we'd all be living in a country like the one that apparently cannot be named in this context, according to Sen. Harris].

No, please don't regret it. You make an excellent point. I'm glad you added it. Rebuttals are fine with me when they have substance, like this one does.

---

Meanwhile, back to the post that started this thread, a post in today's Business Insider quotes that same Carnegie Mellon study but with a slightly different spin:

Roughly half of the Twitter accounts pushing to 'reopen America' are bots, researchers found

So it's not just a lot of bots on the topic, but rather a lot of bots taking one side — reopen America — on the topic.

From the BI Story:

The researchers said they found that among tweets about "reopening America," 66% came from accounts that were possibly humans using bot assistants to spread their tweets more widely, while 34% came from bots.

There are a few possible explanations for the surge in bot activity. People may have more time to set up elaborate bot networks during stay-at-home orders, and the availability of botnets for hire has exploded recently. Carley also said that the global nature of the pandemic meant that countries and interest groups were using it to advance political agendas.