Does Facebook (or other social media) deceive/influence individuals?

[jesmu84]

This article would lead me to believe, yes.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/midwest/indiana/ct-arrest-bleach-autism-treatment-20180214-story.html

If someone would be this influenced to commit this type of act, surely they could be convinced to do other acts - violence, voting, etc.

[Tugg Speedman]

Not new, we have had con artists selling snake oil for as long as we have had a society.  Preachers promising cures, for all your money, is also as old as society.

Regarding you second question, is this just a confirmation bias (these people were going to do this anyway) or can they convince someone to do something against their better judgment?  I come down on it being confirmation bias. This parent was probably not highly educated and also desperate, overwhelmed, alone, scared with dealing with a kid with autism and if not this, it would have been something else.

[GooooMarquette]

It isn't the medium itself, it's the content.  And deceptive content is everywhere; on Facebook, Twitter, newspapers, TV news outlets, advertising flyers.

As for whether people just use the information to justify something they would have done anyway, or do something against their better judgment - it's both.  Regarding the parent who fell for the bleach "cure," it seems like the latter.  Sure, they might  have been desperately searching for "cures."  But I doubt they would ever have thought of feeding their child bleach if they hadn't read about it on FB.

[Tugg Speedman]

It isn't the medium itself, it's the content.  And deceptive content is everywhere; on Facebook, Twitter, newspapers, TV news outlets, advertising flyers.

As for whether people just use the information to justify something they would have done anyway, or do something against their better judgment - it's both.  Regarding the parent who fell for the bleach "cure," it seems like the latter.  Sure, they might  have been desperately searching for "cures."  But I doubt they would ever have thought of feeding their child bleach if they hadn't read about it on FB.

75 years ago it would have been the snake oil salesman from the back of a wagon.  Lying and deceit on FB is a modern version of this.

[GooooMarquette]

75 years ago it would have been the snake oil salesman from the back of a wagon.  Lying and deceit on FB is a modern version of this.

Yes...that's what I was saying.  The snake oil salesman caused people to drink whatever he was peddling - something they NEVER would have done if not for his convincing deceit.  The FB post likewise caused the mother to feed her child something she likely NEVER would have thought of feeding her.

[Tugg Speedman]

To combat lies and deceit on social media, I fear we (as a society) are considering a “Ministry of Truth.”  And I fear that is far more destructive that what we have now.

So how do we “fix this” without resorting to government censorship?

[Dr. Blackheart]

To combat lies and deceit on social media, I fear we (as a society) are considering a “Ministry of Truth.”  And I fear that is far more destructive that what we have now.

So how do we “fix this” without resorting to government censorship?

Tuggie,

This goes back a long way in history, including Silence Dogood.  In many regards, the Internet makes this better in that the speed of debunking and responding can counter Fake News. The Third Estate has taken various forms over the centuries, but it is still alive.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/fake-news-history-long-violent-214535

[WarriorDad]

This article would lead me to believe, yes.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/midwest/indiana/ct-arrest-bleach-autism-treatment-20180214-story.html

If someone would be this influenced to commit this type of act, surely they could be convinced to do other acts - violence, voting, etc.

Is someone that only watches Fox news influenced?  How about only watching MSNBC?   

We tend to go where we are comfortable, visit sites that are agreeable, and respond to ads we already align with.

[jesmu84]

Is someone that only watches Fox news influenced?  How about only watching MSNBC?   

We tend to go where we are comfortable, visit sites that are agreeable, and respond to ads we already align with.

Fair. But does social media make that easier? Especially the idea that you read/see/hear things from those "close" to you, as opposed to the unrelated news anchor

[jesmu84]

To combat lies and deceit on social media, I fear we (as a society) are considering a “Ministry of Truth.”  And I fear that is far more destructive that what we have now.

So how do we “fix this” without resorting to government censorship?

Why would truth be destructive? Most people I know about - similar to this mom - don't believe experts/truth no matter what.

[Tugg Speedman]

Why would truth be destructive? Most people I know about - similar to this mom - don't believe experts/truth no matter what.

So the truth is an absolute that is easily discernible?

[jesmu84]

So the truth is an absolute that is easily discernible?

That's not what I said.

Answer my question

[forgetful]

75 years ago it would have been the snake oil salesman from the back of a wagon.  Lying and deceit on FB is a modern version of this.

No one is saying it didn't exist before. 

The problem is that the facebook/social media allows access to billions of people worldwide.  It also allows for the creation of thousands of blogs/self-claimed-experts, or people who lie about who they are/area of expertise weighing in on the utility of the snake oil. 

It creates the perception of legitimacy that these people desperate for a cure/solution need to make a dumb decision.  In a climate when people are convinced of a drug industry/food industry/deep-state conspiracy, it makes it difficult for actual factual information to be believed and makes the "snake oil" salesmen a powerful force difficult to overcome. 

This has been a problem in healthcare/nutrition for a while, giving rise to anti-vaxxers, "paleo-diets,"  homeopathy and many many others.

The problem isn't that this is happening; the problem is how easy the technology allows mis-information to dominate.

[MU82]

I am not proud to admit that during the past decade, I have relayed maybe 3-4 things I read on FB that proved to be untrue or dubious.

The difference between me and some folks - including some of the most powerful people in the world, most notably a famous gentleman who retweets all kinds of racist, misogynistic and hateful rhetoric - is that when I find out I am wrong, I acknowledge it and apologize for it. I don't just pretend it never happened.

We all make mistakes, including on social media. It's how we respond upon learning that we have made those mistakes that our character is revealed.

As for the question asked in the OP, the answer is obvious: Of course!

[jesmu84]

No one is saying it didn't exist before. 

The problem is that the facebook/social media allows access to billions of people worldwide.  It also allows for the creation of thousands of blogs/self-claimed-experts, or people who lie about who they are/area of expertise weighing in on the utility of the snake oil. 

It creates the perception of legitimacy that these people desperate for a cure/solution need to make a dumb decision.  In a climate when people are convinced of a drug industry/food industry/deep-state conspiracy, it makes it difficult for actual factual information to be believed and makes the "snake oil" salesmen a powerful force difficult to overcome. 

This has been a problem in healthcare/nutrition for a while, giving rise to anti-vaxxers, "paleo-diets,"  homeopathy and many many others.

The problem isn't that this is happening; the problem is how easy the technology allows mis-information to dominate.

This.

[Jockey]

No one is saying it didn't exist before. 

The problem is that the facebook/social media allows access to billions of people worldwide.  It also allows for the creation of thousands of blogs/self-claimed-experts, or people who lie about who they are/area of expertise weighing in on the utility of the snake oil. 

It creates the perception of legitimacy that these people desperate for a cure/solution need to make a dumb decision.  In a climate when people are convinced of a drug industry/food industry/deep-state conspiracy, it makes it difficult for actual factual information to be believed and makes the "snake oil" salesmen a powerful force difficult to overcome. 

This has been a problem in healthcare/nutrition for a while, giving rise to anti-vaxxers, "paleo-diets,"  homeopathy and many many others.

The problem isn't that this is happening; the problem is how easy the technology allows mis-information to dominate.

I read the silly comment by Heisy about snake oil salesmen and was going to comment until I saw your post.

You stated exactly what I was going to write - and did it much better than I would have.

[Jockey]

I am not proud to admit that during the past decade, I have relayed maybe 3-4 things I read on FB that proved to be untrue or dubious.

The difference between me and some folks - including some of the most powerful people in the world, most notably a famous gentleman who retweets all kinds of racist, misogynistic and hateful rhetoric - is that when I find out I am wrong, I acknowledge it and apologize for it. I don't just pretend it never happened.

Interesting analogy here to your comments on newspapers. The NYT and Post, as well as almost all newspapers, immediately issue an apology when they are show to be wrong.

Heisy and the Satan in Washington that he kneels before would never do the same.

[Tugg Speedman]

No one is saying it didn't exist before. 

The problem is that the facebook/social media allows access to billions of people worldwide.  It also allows for the creation of thousands of blogs/self-claimed-experts, or people who lie about who they are/area of expertise weighing in on the utility of the snake oil. 

It creates the perception of legitimacy that these people desperate for a cure/solution need to make a dumb decision.  In a climate when people are convinced of a drug industry/food industry/deep-state conspiracy, it makes it difficult for actual factual information to be believed and makes the "snake oil" salesmen a powerful force difficult to overcome. 

This has been a problem in healthcare/nutrition for a while, giving rise to anti-vaxxers, "paleo-diets,"  homeopathy and many many others.

The problem isn't that this is happening; the problem is how easy the technology allows mis-information to dominate.

Completely agree. 

The question is what to do about it?  Who decides and how?

[Jay Bee]

Lotta deception right on this here site, ain1l?

[Tugg Speedman]

Why would truth be destructive? Most people I know about - similar to this mom - don't believe experts/truth no matter what.

The truth is not destructive, its just how do you know what it is?  For instance ...

* The Russian tried to influence our election by spreading false and fake post on social media

* To date, no collision has been found.  To date, no US citizens have been implicated.

* to date no one has suggested it changed the outcome of the election

All of these are true.  So what does the ministry of truth do with this?  Only accept certain truths and not others?

And, given all the lying, "experts" are not held in high regard.  Why?  Becuase most think experts are not representing their best interests.

[Tugg Speedman]

This just in ... this is what happens when we have a ministry of truth (run by Facebook), they ban legitimate news organizations.

http://truthinmedia.com/brazils-largest-newspaper-abandons-facebook-banning-professional-journalism/

The largest newspaper in Brazil, Folha de S Paulo, announced late last week that due to Facebook’s recent changes to their news feed algorithm resulting in what the paper claims is “effectively banning professional journalism,” it would cease publishing content on the social media platform.

The Guardian reported that the popular Brazilian newspaper has an online and print subscription base of nearly 285,000 subscribers and had roughly 204 million page impressions last December, according to the Communication Verification Institute, a non-profit media auditor. The company’s Facebook page has nearly 6 million Facebook followers.

Only weeks ago, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s co-founder and CEO, announced that the company would be changing the algorithm used to determine what shows up in an individual’s Newsfeed to prioritize “meaningful social interactions” and posts by friends, and “trusted” news sources.

Folha noted that the choice to abandon Facebook was “a reflection of internal discussions about the best ways to get the content of the newspaper to reach its readers. The disadvantages of using Facebook as a path to this distribution became more evident after the social network’s decision to reduce the visibility of professional journalism on its users’ pages.”

A separate report in Folha noted that the newspaper’s own analysis found that “fake news pages received five times the number of engagements that professional journalism received” during the month of January.

[jesmu84]

The truth is not destructive, its just how do you know what it is?  For instance ...

* The Russian tried to influence our election by spreading false and fake post on social media

* To date, no collision has been found.  To date, no US citizens have been implicated.

* to date no one has suggested it changed the outcome of the election

All of these are true.  So what does the ministry of truth do with this?  Only accept certain truths and not others?

And, given all the lying, "experts" are not held in high regard.  Why?  Becuase most think experts are not representing their best interests.

I'm not sure what deep-state, bad acid trip you're on...

I'm talking about someone telling that mom that what she was feeding her child was bleach. Which can cause significant harm. Someone who is an expert, like a physician. And that someone not being believed.

[GooooMarquette]

I actually agree with Heisy on the Ministry of Truth concept.

If there was one today, it would be under the control of someone who would tell us that  there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville, and would list himself as the "least racist person" in America. Not sure those are the kind of "truths" we need.

[GooooMarquette]

* To date, no collision has been found.  To date, no US citizens have been implicated.

Correction. Bob Mueller and team have not told us whether they have found collusion that implicates US citizens. For all we know, that could be in the next round of indictments. He has surprised all of us before...

[forgetful]

Correction. Bob Mueller and team have not told us whether they have found collusion that implicates US citizens. For all we know, that could be in the next round of indictments. He has surprised all of us before...

Actually, a US citizen was charged, Richard Pinedo, but it really isn't the point of this thread.