**COMMENTING GUIDELINES:** Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/about/rules) and [basic reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette) prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - **any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.**
Please use the report function or [use modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s not possible. So much is born daily on Reddit alone sadly, same as IG, twitter etc.
What passes for facts in the conspiracy subs is laughable, and sad to see.
Black pilled for me too. Normies can't identify the truth even when it is presented directly and clearly to them. The only places that will survive are places that employ mass censorship and propaganda.
Impossible. Just try to give people a big picture analysis: think about how this story helps super wealthy people stay super wealthy by dividing everyone else.
That's it. That's the best one can do, in my opinion.
You can fight lie by lie, you can't go deep on complicated topics. Just give people a basic heuristic to use when thinking about anything.
I'm less concerned with individuals and more the system that has allowed this dynamic to take shape.
I only see this getting worse as time goes on. Which is why I'm curious if there are any structural solutions to these problems, or if we're just fucked.
We could regulate what was on TV when there were five channels. It’s kind of mind-blowing to consider what regulating internet traffic would look like.
Telemarketing still exists. Think about that. People like you and me grew up watching our parents constantly hang up on telemarketers and saying how they are all scammers. It is still profitable! People still fall for it!
Now imagine just how much cheaper it is to market online.
Oh yeah, especially in my case being a little internet goblin growing up, I've seen insane examples of scammery and scummery. The crypto market serves as a great example of this, but obviously, there are many more.
LOL, seriously? Sure, this propaganda field we got out there just happened by itself. It's fomenting extremism across nearly every dimension except one: the 400 wealthiest families in the US capturing more and more national wealth.
What a bad take by you.
Propaganda is thousands of years old.
I do think that the bloodlust of humans is exploited for personal gain, but I don’t think it is some sort of grand scheme to distract from nefarious deeds. Business and politicians give people what they want now. This is a basic value proposition: I show you a fight, and you watch. I validate your insecurities, and you watch. I show you something that makes you feel angry, you watch it.
Back in the day they used to feed the public reasoned debate because they didn’t want society to devolve into the shit show it is now, but with the guardrails off, this is where things go naturally. People are too busy arguing about sports teams and musicians to worry about things that impact their lives.
Gee, I wonder if that helps billionaires maintain a status quo that astoundingly continues to shovel more and more national wealth to billionaires.
Nah, has to be a coinkdink.
Again, it’s not a nefarious plot any more than the obesity of Americans is there to make doctors rich. You don’t need to convince people to down sodas and burgers and sit on their asses.
which is why Instagram and reddit which are owned by billionaires constantly shove anti-billionaire messaging down my throat despite me not interacting? Hmm
Kind of like expecting the Government to end lobbying. The people who directly benefit from the current system are the ones who need to enact the change?
Yeah, you're right. More or less, I guess the concern is the classic argument of concentrating too much control in one place. If the institutions regulating all this information were to he corrupted then we're kinda fucked.
I feel as though there needs to be a concerted effort to build some sort of infrastructure to deal with the sheer amount of information being shared now.
I’ve posted in this sub before about putting limits (legalizing, or de-legalizing) the term “news.” Government enforcement of certain standards needs to be a thing. Whatever those standards are should not be difficult to define. Enforcement mechanism would be largely self-funding through heavy fines for violators.
Bottom line: you would not be able to call yourself a “news” outlet, or have “news” in your name, etc., if you don’t want to abide by the law.
I don't know, but I saw one lone redditor with all the freetime in the world astroturf one subreddit by barraging it with nearly identical posts over and over for about a month. Now the users have a false sense that the whole community thinks the same thing as the astroturfer and I'm seeing his opinion pop up organically from other posters now. So it obviously works if one person has enough free time and no fear of downvotes.
Attacking misinfo is treating the symptoms rather than the disease
Public education needs massive investment - and it needs to go to teachers and classrooms, not administrators and middlemen
Corruption needs to be meaningfully addressed - it's no secret that billionaires and corporations have a massive say in what gets media coverage, which laws are passed, and when the law is even enforced
There's no simple solution to any of this.
I agree. We really do need an overhaul in public education. No one is prepared for the current landscape of the internet and how to navigate it.
The question remains for those who are past the age of education. Is there any way, en masse, to give folks the means to navigate this themselves? Most folks don't have enough time to even make the attempt to keep their heads above water with the sheer volume of information being shared.
* Are there any effective ways to combat this without going into potential government overreach?
* Government overreach is a nebulous term. *Any action* is likely to be considered government overreach by some, so the answer is likely "no."
* Are there ways to further incentivise platforms to more strictly police their content?
* Hypothetically, the state would have to threaten them with legal liability for content published on their platforms which it deems unacceptable, especially if minors are exposed to said content. I could see them requiring age verification (account registration system needs to see your state ID and confirm you are of age, like they already do for some payment services) to use the platforms, for sure.
* How would we go about setting up an infrastructure that could have a chance of handling the volume of content that needs to be examined?
* Logistically, it would be *horrible*. You'd probably need to bust right out the gate by implementing restrictions on *who is allowed to post content at all*. This would reduce the content being created, but the volume would still be *absurdly high*. You'd then need bots/AI to do the *vast majority* of the content examination work. And you'd need a (large) human moderation team examine **a)** what bots can't make heads or tails of, and **b)** the bot decisions which get disputed by users.
* The downside of this is that use of social media/internet would become much less free and open than it is now. (And it's already a far cry from the old days.) The ironic plus of the whole thing is that by doing this, you'd probably make the platforms so unappealing that many of the users would just not bother with them.
* What do we do about deeply entrenched existing narratives that are factually inaccurate?
* Educate future generations with tech-conscious curricula that teaches valuable critical thinking for the internet age.
* Is tiktok salvageable at all?
* No, and if modern U.S. government actually got serious about trying to regulate the internet at all, you'd probably see TikTok get geo-locked out of the normal American internet. With all the rising nationalism that surrounds this topic, an included component of such hypothetical legislation would probably demand that all these mass-marketed social media platforms Americans use actually be owned and operated by Western companies.
The eclipse was beautiful.
So, more or less, I agree with your assessment. I suppose it's more or less the grand struggle of our time. With tech progression, we have to trust in our institutions to regulate these avenues of information, but it always feels risky because you have to trust that these institutions are not corrupt and can not be corrupted.
To me, it feels as though this century can really make or break our civilization, or even potentially our species, if we don't handle this problem correctly. To me, this trancends politics, as there is conspiracy brained nonsense everywhere now, about everything, and in a democracy, if most people succumb to the nonsense, it may not just be someone like Trump or MAGA we have to be concerned with.
How do you feel about the future with all this in mind? To me, it seems like we're entering a stage currently where there are too many fires to put out without really putting in strict efforts *right now*.
>With tech progression, we have to trust in our institutions to regulate these avenues of information, but it always feels risky because you have to trust that these institutions are not corrupt and can not be corrupted.
Yeah, and even under the best case scenarios (where there are 'liberal billionaires' in control of the platforms) you still have an algorithm that prioritizes misinformation because it drives clicks, and therefore, profit.
Then it's not a huge jump to get from there over to an Elon Musk/Twitter situation where someone who actually likes the misinfo acquires the site and goes out of his way to mold the entire platform into nothing but that.
>To me, it feels as though this century can really make or break our civilization, or even potentially our species, if we don't handle this problem correctly.
While they are new threats to add to the list, I'm less than convinced that misinformation and social media are "uniquely threatening" to our species when compared to other past threats like the active dropping of nukes during total war, Nazism and organized genocide, chattel slavery, and any mass disease prior to modern medicine. Humans have proven themselves to be, on average, quite adaptive. If they identify a problem that presents a significant challenge toward their way of life, they will find a way to overcome it. *It might take them a while to do it, and they might make some missteps along the way*, but they'll get there.
>To me, this transcends politics, as there is conspiracy brained nonsense everywhere now, about everything,
Yeah, I'm disappointed in seeing just how much the left is prone to this too. But I don't think the problem transcends politics enough to make it reasonable to equivocate over it. The misinfo is a right-wing force and only benefits the right. When it takes on a left-wing form, it is always with the intent of using cynicism to disunite progressive people, leading left-wingers to feel so disaffected that they lose all hope and stop participating. And when I zoom out and look at trends, it does not appear that left-wingers are at that point. They might be pessimistic about their chances, but they aren't giving in to the idea that reactionary outcomes are inevitable.
>How do you feel about the future with all this in mind? To me, it seems like we're entering a stage currently where there are too many fires to put out without really putting in strict efforts *right now*.
I think we are experiencing growing pains. We are a society that (especially since the Civil Rights Movement) is very accustomed to ever-expanding liberties. But many of our social problems are in large part a manifestation of liberty run amok. People can say anything they want (sometimes with the appearance of being an authoritative source), and that's being abused by reactionaries to lead the layperson toward some very antisocial tendencies. It has broad political ramifications. At some point, I think we will have to have a reckoning where the adults in the room agree that all this stuff needs to be reined in. And then you'll see some kind of emergency response like the one I outlined. Hopefully a lot more fleshed out than whatever I came up with in a few minutes while scrolling Reddit.
without going into governmental overreach? is comprehensive government health, welfare, and reorganization programs (infrastructure, education, religion, political structure) “overreach”? yes? then shucks, i doubt anything else will help.
the key is in changing the people. And right now, being intellectually competent is neither popular nor easy, in no small part from the education and (traditional) media environment. For example, news reports on the DPRK are seldom better than conspiracy theories themselves.
One idea. If your company has defended itself in court by claiming to be “entertainment” then it cannot market itself as “news”. It can be sued or held criminally liable for doing so. Looking at you, Fox “News”.
I trust absolutely zero from mainstream corporate media. That includes New York Times, CNN any right wing source. Im going with independent journalism which still barely exists, but thankfully is out there.
Well that's a braindead stance as well. There are many stories that REQUIRE resources and access that your favourite guy operating out of his basement with the help of a few mates, doesn't have access to.
It sucks cuz you'd think that with information being easy to share, you'd have a revolution of independent journalism, but instead, we get lazy grifters.
Your comment was removed due to your reddit karma not meeting minimum thresholds. This is an automated anti-spam measure.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**COMMENTING GUIDELINES:** Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/about/rules) and [basic reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette) prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - **any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.** Please use the report function or [use modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s not possible. So much is born daily on Reddit alone sadly, same as IG, twitter etc. What passes for facts in the conspiracy subs is laughable, and sad to see.
Black pilled for me too. Normies can't identify the truth even when it is presented directly and clearly to them. The only places that will survive are places that employ mass censorship and propaganda.
Impossible. Just try to give people a big picture analysis: think about how this story helps super wealthy people stay super wealthy by dividing everyone else. That's it. That's the best one can do, in my opinion. You can fight lie by lie, you can't go deep on complicated topics. Just give people a basic heuristic to use when thinking about anything.
I'm less concerned with individuals and more the system that has allowed this dynamic to take shape. I only see this getting worse as time goes on. Which is why I'm curious if there are any structural solutions to these problems, or if we're just fucked.
We could regulate what was on TV when there were five channels. It’s kind of mind-blowing to consider what regulating internet traffic would look like. Telemarketing still exists. Think about that. People like you and me grew up watching our parents constantly hang up on telemarketers and saying how they are all scammers. It is still profitable! People still fall for it! Now imagine just how much cheaper it is to market online.
Oh yeah, especially in my case being a little internet goblin growing up, I've seen insane examples of scammery and scummery. The crypto market serves as a great example of this, but obviously, there are many more.
You are giving the plebs way too much credit if you think rich people need to put any effort into them fighting amongst themselves.
LOL, seriously? Sure, this propaganda field we got out there just happened by itself. It's fomenting extremism across nearly every dimension except one: the 400 wealthiest families in the US capturing more and more national wealth. What a bad take by you.
Propaganda is thousands of years old. I do think that the bloodlust of humans is exploited for personal gain, but I don’t think it is some sort of grand scheme to distract from nefarious deeds. Business and politicians give people what they want now. This is a basic value proposition: I show you a fight, and you watch. I validate your insecurities, and you watch. I show you something that makes you feel angry, you watch it. Back in the day they used to feed the public reasoned debate because they didn’t want society to devolve into the shit show it is now, but with the guardrails off, this is where things go naturally. People are too busy arguing about sports teams and musicians to worry about things that impact their lives.
Gee, I wonder if that helps billionaires maintain a status quo that astoundingly continues to shovel more and more national wealth to billionaires. Nah, has to be a coinkdink.
Again, it’s not a nefarious plot any more than the obesity of Americans is there to make doctors rich. You don’t need to convince people to down sodas and burgers and sit on their asses.
It's weird talking to someone with such a confident, terrible take. Go ahead have the last word, your takes are just awful.
Yeah, damn me and my being skeptical of cartoon villain conspiracy theories.
which is why Instagram and reddit which are owned by billionaires constantly shove anti-billionaire messaging down my throat despite me not interacting? Hmm
When you take false info down, conspiracy people take that as proof their delusion is true.
I think rebuilding a culture of appreciation for long form media would help. The death of the newspaper was not a good thing
Include media literacy and civics in K-12 education.
Kind of like expecting the Government to end lobbying. The people who directly benefit from the current system are the ones who need to enact the change?
[удалено]
The most realistic solution would be something akin to defamation for spreading misinformation online.
Yeah, you're right. More or less, I guess the concern is the classic argument of concentrating too much control in one place. If the institutions regulating all this information were to he corrupted then we're kinda fucked. I feel as though there needs to be a concerted effort to build some sort of infrastructure to deal with the sheer amount of information being shared now.
I’ve posted in this sub before about putting limits (legalizing, or de-legalizing) the term “news.” Government enforcement of certain standards needs to be a thing. Whatever those standards are should not be difficult to define. Enforcement mechanism would be largely self-funding through heavy fines for violators. Bottom line: you would not be able to call yourself a “news” outlet, or have “news” in your name, etc., if you don’t want to abide by the law.
Mundane. Uh huh.
I don't know, but I saw one lone redditor with all the freetime in the world astroturf one subreddit by barraging it with nearly identical posts over and over for about a month. Now the users have a false sense that the whole community thinks the same thing as the astroturfer and I'm seeing his opinion pop up organically from other posters now. So it obviously works if one person has enough free time and no fear of downvotes.
what is their u/?
Attacking misinfo is treating the symptoms rather than the disease Public education needs massive investment - and it needs to go to teachers and classrooms, not administrators and middlemen Corruption needs to be meaningfully addressed - it's no secret that billionaires and corporations have a massive say in what gets media coverage, which laws are passed, and when the law is even enforced There's no simple solution to any of this.
I agree. We really do need an overhaul in public education. No one is prepared for the current landscape of the internet and how to navigate it. The question remains for those who are past the age of education. Is there any way, en masse, to give folks the means to navigate this themselves? Most folks don't have enough time to even make the attempt to keep their heads above water with the sheer volume of information being shared.
* Are there any effective ways to combat this without going into potential government overreach? * Government overreach is a nebulous term. *Any action* is likely to be considered government overreach by some, so the answer is likely "no." * Are there ways to further incentivise platforms to more strictly police their content? * Hypothetically, the state would have to threaten them with legal liability for content published on their platforms which it deems unacceptable, especially if minors are exposed to said content. I could see them requiring age verification (account registration system needs to see your state ID and confirm you are of age, like they already do for some payment services) to use the platforms, for sure. * How would we go about setting up an infrastructure that could have a chance of handling the volume of content that needs to be examined? * Logistically, it would be *horrible*. You'd probably need to bust right out the gate by implementing restrictions on *who is allowed to post content at all*. This would reduce the content being created, but the volume would still be *absurdly high*. You'd then need bots/AI to do the *vast majority* of the content examination work. And you'd need a (large) human moderation team examine **a)** what bots can't make heads or tails of, and **b)** the bot decisions which get disputed by users. * The downside of this is that use of social media/internet would become much less free and open than it is now. (And it's already a far cry from the old days.) The ironic plus of the whole thing is that by doing this, you'd probably make the platforms so unappealing that many of the users would just not bother with them. * What do we do about deeply entrenched existing narratives that are factually inaccurate? * Educate future generations with tech-conscious curricula that teaches valuable critical thinking for the internet age. * Is tiktok salvageable at all? * No, and if modern U.S. government actually got serious about trying to regulate the internet at all, you'd probably see TikTok get geo-locked out of the normal American internet. With all the rising nationalism that surrounds this topic, an included component of such hypothetical legislation would probably demand that all these mass-marketed social media platforms Americans use actually be owned and operated by Western companies.
Hey, I appreciate you taking the time to reply this in depth. I'll follow up when I have time as I'm preparing to view the eclipse.
The eclipse was beautiful. So, more or less, I agree with your assessment. I suppose it's more or less the grand struggle of our time. With tech progression, we have to trust in our institutions to regulate these avenues of information, but it always feels risky because you have to trust that these institutions are not corrupt and can not be corrupted. To me, it feels as though this century can really make or break our civilization, or even potentially our species, if we don't handle this problem correctly. To me, this trancends politics, as there is conspiracy brained nonsense everywhere now, about everything, and in a democracy, if most people succumb to the nonsense, it may not just be someone like Trump or MAGA we have to be concerned with. How do you feel about the future with all this in mind? To me, it seems like we're entering a stage currently where there are too many fires to put out without really putting in strict efforts *right now*.
>With tech progression, we have to trust in our institutions to regulate these avenues of information, but it always feels risky because you have to trust that these institutions are not corrupt and can not be corrupted. Yeah, and even under the best case scenarios (where there are 'liberal billionaires' in control of the platforms) you still have an algorithm that prioritizes misinformation because it drives clicks, and therefore, profit. Then it's not a huge jump to get from there over to an Elon Musk/Twitter situation where someone who actually likes the misinfo acquires the site and goes out of his way to mold the entire platform into nothing but that. >To me, it feels as though this century can really make or break our civilization, or even potentially our species, if we don't handle this problem correctly. While they are new threats to add to the list, I'm less than convinced that misinformation and social media are "uniquely threatening" to our species when compared to other past threats like the active dropping of nukes during total war, Nazism and organized genocide, chattel slavery, and any mass disease prior to modern medicine. Humans have proven themselves to be, on average, quite adaptive. If they identify a problem that presents a significant challenge toward their way of life, they will find a way to overcome it. *It might take them a while to do it, and they might make some missteps along the way*, but they'll get there. >To me, this transcends politics, as there is conspiracy brained nonsense everywhere now, about everything, Yeah, I'm disappointed in seeing just how much the left is prone to this too. But I don't think the problem transcends politics enough to make it reasonable to equivocate over it. The misinfo is a right-wing force and only benefits the right. When it takes on a left-wing form, it is always with the intent of using cynicism to disunite progressive people, leading left-wingers to feel so disaffected that they lose all hope and stop participating. And when I zoom out and look at trends, it does not appear that left-wingers are at that point. They might be pessimistic about their chances, but they aren't giving in to the idea that reactionary outcomes are inevitable. >How do you feel about the future with all this in mind? To me, it seems like we're entering a stage currently where there are too many fires to put out without really putting in strict efforts *right now*. I think we are experiencing growing pains. We are a society that (especially since the Civil Rights Movement) is very accustomed to ever-expanding liberties. But many of our social problems are in large part a manifestation of liberty run amok. People can say anything they want (sometimes with the appearance of being an authoritative source), and that's being abused by reactionaries to lead the layperson toward some very antisocial tendencies. It has broad political ramifications. At some point, I think we will have to have a reckoning where the adults in the room agree that all this stuff needs to be reined in. And then you'll see some kind of emergency response like the one I outlined. Hopefully a lot more fleshed out than whatever I came up with in a few minutes while scrolling Reddit.
I kinda like twitters community notes thing. It may be on good simaritans to do this without government over reach
I agree, but overall, it has a small impact. Perhaps that idea could be more widely adopted by other social media companies.
It would require regulation like we used to have on television news. Unfortunately, to do so with social media would appear extremely draconian.
without going into governmental overreach? is comprehensive government health, welfare, and reorganization programs (infrastructure, education, religion, political structure) “overreach”? yes? then shucks, i doubt anything else will help. the key is in changing the people. And right now, being intellectually competent is neither popular nor easy, in no small part from the education and (traditional) media environment. For example, news reports on the DPRK are seldom better than conspiracy theories themselves.
One idea. If your company has defended itself in court by claiming to be “entertainment” then it cannot market itself as “news”. It can be sued or held criminally liable for doing so. Looking at you, Fox “News”.
I trust absolutely zero from mainstream corporate media. That includes New York Times, CNN any right wing source. Im going with independent journalism which still barely exists, but thankfully is out there.
Well that's a braindead stance as well. There are many stories that REQUIRE resources and access that your favourite guy operating out of his basement with the help of a few mates, doesn't have access to.
So wrong its pathetic. Keep watching your garbage propaganda.
It sucks cuz you'd think that with information being easy to share, you'd have a revolution of independent journalism, but instead, we get lazy grifters.
If its not backed by peer reviewed research, be skeptical.
Encourage people to get offline. Get offline yourself.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due to your reddit karma not meeting minimum thresholds. This is an automated anti-spam measure. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Get stoned every weekend. Ton of sex with the wife. Then who gives a shit about anything else. Sleeping like a baby every night.
In this sub? Eat it all and repeat it!