But as a quick summary on the subject I thought he did quite well.
I mostly agree with that. Except:
He doesn't go very deep into what he seems fake news, just a summary of what it is.
His summery does not include large news organisations and specifically targets social media.
He goes into the cause and effect of the facebook-style viral news, but doesn't acknowledge that that is only one part, and the smaller one.
The causes and effects can be similar, but have some distinct differences. I feel that his leaving that out is because he does not view big media as fake news.
Fakeness in large media is a much bigger problem, and he almost seems to be shining the light in the wrong direction. I don't think this video will make people skeptical of all news, just viral social stuff.
Who believes facebook crap? Not many. Who believes The Guardian? Many people.
AND NOT ACTUALLY READ THE ARTICLE.
Sometimes we just have to accept reality. Many people read only headlines, telling them to read the article won't change that. And those are usually the same people that are the most excitable. They get upset/happy and reshare it everywhere.
They are dumb, counter-productive, and not good for much, but they outnumber us. Like it or not, they have the numbers, so will always have more influence.
We have to account for their behaviour, because you can't fix stupid. So I think he's just trying for something smaller that might be more attainable.
We're all trapped in our own bubble in a way.
Yep. The best we can do is try to compensate as best we can. I think the less sure we are about how our bias is influencing us, the better a job we're doing.
It has always seemed to me that a person who thinks they are unbiased, are the most influenced by it. The most reasonable people I've met are usually quick to point out doubts in their own knowledge.
But trying to convince someone that if they are 'sure', then they are wrong, is a hard sell.
Not me though, I am 100% aware that I've no idea what I'm talking about.
Why do you never actually say what you mean?
Is it because you know you sound stupid when you say it plainly?
I read that article. I'm not surprised that my flippant response to your failed baiting was lost on you.
We're all trapped in our own bubble in a way.
He doesn't go very deep into what he seems fake news, just a summary of what it is. But goes more in depth of its cause and effect, which I found to be more of the focus.
One thing that bothered me was the conclusion to stop and think about the headline before reposting it. AND NOT ACTUALLY READ THE ARTICLE.
But as a quick summary on the subject I thought he did quite well.