Ctrl-Alt-Speech: Don’t Believe What This Podcast Says About Misinformation
from the ctrl-alt-speech dept
Ctrl-Alt-Speech is a weekly podcast about the latest news in online speech, from Mike Masnick and Everything in Moderation‘s Ben Whitelaw.
Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify, Pocket Casts, YouTube, or your podcast app of choice — or go straight to the RSS feed.
In this week’s round-up of the latest news in online speech, content moderation and internet regulation, Mike and Ben cover:
- The Misleading Panic over Misinformation (Cato Institute)
- Claims that Online Misinformation Fears Are Overblown ‘Radically Understates’ the Scale of the Threat (Byline Times)
- EU Disinformation Code Takes Effect Amid Censorship Claims and Trade Tensions (Tech Policy Press)
- Content Moderation Is Not Censorship (Law & Liberty)
- Asked to think like a paedophile or act suicidal: Workers training Meta’s AI in Ireland speak out (The Journal)
- The Hidden Human Cost of AI Moderation (Jacobin)
- Brazil rules that social media platforms are responsible for users’ posts (Rest of World)
- X opens up to Community Notes written by AI bots (The Verge)
This episode is brought to you with financial support from the Future of Online Trust & Safety Fund.
Filed Under: ai, artificial intelligence, brazil, community notes, content moderation, labor rights, misinformation
Companies: meta, twitter, x
Comments on “Ctrl-Alt-Speech: Don’t Believe What This Podcast Says About Misinformation”
The issue with pointing to media & information literacy as a solution in the here and the now, is that our current problems and the downward trajectory of the U.S. and peoples’ freedoms in it under the Trump Administration, and the kinds of lies that get spread that enable it, cannot be solved through media/info literacy for kids.
Re:
I hear this and… I’m sorry, but it annoys me as an answer. Because it means that you think the real solution is too hard, so you’re demanding a magic wand.
Re: Re:
We need real solutions for the here and now. A large number of the people causing harm through believing and spreading lies at this current point in time are adults, not setting foot in a classroom ever again. We also aren’t going to get the kinds of comprehensive media literacy initiatives they have in Finland that people talk a lot about under this current administration and its Department of Education.
I don’t want a magic wand. I want a cohesive set of ideas on how to directly counteract and combat the falsehoods and malicious tribalism online and offline that helped to bring us to this current political reality, and are keeping us here in this current political reality. “Protocols Not Platforms” and “Fix Societal Problems” isn’t going to cut it.
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, and I have suggested them and your response is “nah, too fucking hard, give me something easier.” It’s useless.
Yes. So maybe think more creatively?
You sure act like you do.
Yes, I’ve tried giving a cohesive set of ideas, and your response is “eh, too much work.”
Re: Re: Re:2
How do media/info literacy classes help us right now when those kids you presumably want taking the classes won’t be old enough to be able to vote in 2026 and 2028 where we need them most?
Re: Re: Re:3
That’s your problem. As I told you: you want instant gratification. You want things fixed “right now.”
Life isn’t like that. It takes time and work and effort. It’s not a magic wand. it’s not fixed overnight. Stop pining for magic. Do the actual work. Brick by brick.
Re: Re: Re:4
Elections 2026 and 2028. These are two pivotal election years. How do media literacy classes for kids who won’t be able to vote in those elections help us win them?
Re: Re: Re:5
Who said we needed “media literacy classes for kids”? We need media literacy for everyone, but it helps to start with kids.
As for elections in 2026 and 2028, I notice you are defining success by “well we must elect Democrats.” If that’s your only measure, then, well, you just want a dictatorship that determines who wins elections.
STOP PINING FOR A MAGIC WAND AND START DOING THE FUCKING WORK.
Re: Re: Re:4
There are a lot of people here in this country that don’t have the privilege of acting or planning in the span of time that you’re thinking about. And I do emphasize “privilege” there. How was the jazz festival while elsewhere in your state, Los Angeles was being assailed by ICE?
Re: Re: Re:5
Yes. You’re right back to wanting the magic wand.
You’re also assuming, incorrectly, that the misinformation is the sole source of today’s problems.
It’s possible… that’s misinformation.
It was excellent. I could similarly ask why are you spending your time whining at someone who is on your side rather than fucking doing anything serious?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Alright I won’t. Thanks for letting me know.
Re: Goatfuckers gonna fuck goats
Didn’t you leave forever?
Where Facebook basically admits that they censor content because they’re scared a tiny number of child predators might enjoy it.
Re:
Huh? I don’t even think we mentioned Facebook in this episode, and didn’t have anything about what you’re addressing.
For a long time, I’ve suspected the “mods see traumatic content” argument was a ploy to negotiate for higher wages.
Here, they give the game away. They’ve watered down “traumatic content” down all the way to textual content with offensive themes like a horror novel or erotica coupled with alarmist language like What if a Child Predator likes it? (a tiny group of people).
No one should take these people seriously ever again.
The mods always see traumatic content argument was always… thin. The vast majority of content they have to review is actually pretty mundane, not actual CSAM.
Mods play on stereotypes about their jobs to negotiate for higher pay. AI apologists seize on these stereotypes to replace humans with unreliable machines.
Re:
Tell me you haven’t read any of the accounts of what some mods have to review without telling me you haven’t read any of the accounts of what some mods have to review.
Thanks for the nuanced discussion
Hi Mike and Ben. Thanks for the nuanced discussion of my Cato piece. I certainly am responding to the tendency to view misinformation as this poison that is inevitably infecting anyone it touches as well as the view that misinformation is clear to identify, when there is a huge spectrum of material that might be misleading depending on who you ask because it frames something in a way you don’t like, or doesn’t provide context that you think is important- and thats a scary thing when you add government enforcement a al the EU. I also do think that the collapse in trust in our institutions is a huge underlying problem that doesn’t have an easy answer. One place where I think I differ from Eliot is the degree of trust or deference due to these institutions. If I read his criticism right, he is afraid of the break down of institutions and truth becoming tribal. I don’t disagree but I think misinformation is more a symptom than a cause. The internet, like the printing press and other technologies before it, have broken down the power of the gatekeepers and in this new world, these experts and gatekeepers need to do more to prove their case rather than rely on their authority and position, which I think happened to much in the recent past. Experts do have knowledge and know how that is valuable but they need to be more open to challenge and criticism so that the system of knowledge development isn’t captured or static. And as you note with the printing press, this new technology means massive disruptions that we will need to work through but not panic over. Anyway, appreciate the discussion and constructive criticism.