I don’t know the ratio of real to fake info on Tea, but all ways to provide information about someone are subject to fabrication of inaccurate information.

Many years ago when newspapers, magazines, or books wrote about someone, at least some of the time they may have tried to verify part of the information.

Today, there’s very little expectation that something on an app or website has been partially or thoroughly fact-checked.

For the sake of argument, let’s say 20% of the data is fabricated.

If 80% of the information on Tea about others being a safety risk were true, would that be worth chancing that 20% would have false information spread about them, mostly quietly to a small percentage of the population in a way that didn’t really affect their lives substantially?

I’m not defending Tea losing their users’ data nor defending those that spread disinformation.

However, if the majority of the data were correct and helped others, and if the incorrect information didn’t destroy or substantially affect someone, then I think it may have been better to have had the 80% truth, if it were to have prevented violent crime.

Also newspapers would generally only discuss public figures or major crimes, not smear small time individuals who lack the funds to pursue legal remedy. This app is truly disgusting. If you support it, do not talk to me.