Counter-Disinformation Fail

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7508
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by Woodchopper »

Apparently Instagram just suspended the Cochrane Collaboration for spreading disinformation.
https://twitter.com/cochranecollab/stat ... 85536?s=21

Perhaps a misfiring algorithm, or maybe a malicious report by some anti-scientist.

Whatever happened it shows how social media companies are struggling to tell what is and isn’t disinformation.
User avatar
discovolante
Light of Blast
Posts: 4333
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by discovolante »

The replies suggest it might be to do with a review that concluded that surgical mask wearing had little impact on transmission of flu. I think we can guess the direction that went...so possibly an algorithm, people using Cochrane as evidence against mask wearing....yes tricky.
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.
User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7508
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by Woodchopper »

And now Facebook blocked an article in the British Medical Journal: https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95
tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by tom p »

Woodchopper wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:08 pm And now Facebook blocked an article in the British Medical Journal: https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95
In all fairness, it is a b.llsh.t article, a piece of comment by an antivax c.nt and commissioned by another who has become an editor there somehow. The article was reported here in the pandemic arena and torn to shreds by Orac.
I'm glad they blocked it & hopefully it will make the BMJ think twice before they decide to destroy their reputation
User avatar
Cardinal Fang
Snowbonk
Posts: 421
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 7:42 pm

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by Cardinal Fang »

tom p wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:20 am
Woodchopper wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:08 pm And now Facebook blocked an article in the British Medical Journal: https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95
In all fairness, it is a b.llsh.t article, a piece of comment by an antivax c.nt and commissioned by another who has become an editor there somehow. The article was reported here in the pandemic arena and torn to shreds by Orac.
I'm glad they blocked it & hopefully it will make the BMJ think twice before they decide to destroy their reputation
Linkie to the Orac piece?

Been trawling through the Covid posts and can't see it, but could just be me being blind

CF
Image
User avatar
shpalman
Princess POW
Posts: 8623
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond
Contact:

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by shpalman »

Cardinal Fang wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 9:56 pm
tom p wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:20 am
Woodchopper wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:08 pm And now Facebook blocked an article in the British Medical Journal: https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95
In all fairness, it is a b.llsh.t article, a piece of comment by an antivax c.nt and commissioned by another who has become an editor there somehow. The article was reported here in the pandemic arena and torn to shreds by Orac.
I'm glad they blocked it & hopefully it will make the BMJ think twice before they decide to destroy their reputation
Linkie to the Orac piece?

Been trawling through the Covid posts and can't see it, but could just be me being blind

CF
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/11 ... o-the-bmj/
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman.bsky.social / bsky.app/profile/chrastina.net
threads.net/@dannychrastina
tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by tom p »

shpalman wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 10:11 pm
Cardinal Fang wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 9:56 pm
tom p wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:20 am
In all fairness, it is a b.llsh.t article, a piece of comment by an antivax c.nt and commissioned by another who has become an editor there somehow. The article was reported here in the pandemic arena and torn to shreds by Orac.
I'm glad they blocked it & hopefully it will make the BMJ think twice before they decide to destroy their reputation
Linkie to the Orac piece?

Been trawling through the Covid posts and can't see it, but could just be me being blind

CF
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/11 ... o-the-bmj/
that's the one. cheers mate
User avatar
Cardinal Fang
Snowbonk
Posts: 421
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 7:42 pm

Re: Counter-Disinformation Fail

Post by Cardinal Fang »

Ta
Image
Post Reply