Not in the original statement, but as it referenced here, the word 'information' is doing absolutely ludicrous amounts of lifting. Hopefully it bent at the knees, because it my book it broke.

You can't call the phrase "the sky is mint chocolate chip pink with pulsate alien clouds" information.

▲

ayntkilove 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You can call it data and have sufficient respect of others that they may process it into information. Too many have too little faith in others. If anything we need to be deluged in data and we will probably work it out ourselves eventually.

	▲	protocolture 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Facebook does its utmost to subject me to Tartarian, Flat Earth and Creationist content. Yes I block it routinely. No the algo doesnt let up. I dont need "faith" when I can see that a decent chunk of people disbelieve modern history, and aggressively disbelieve science. More data doesnt help.

▲

arevno 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

While this is true, It's also important to realize that during the great disinformation hysteria, perfectly reasonable statements like "This may have originated from a lab", "These vaccines are non-sterilizing", or "There were some anomalies of Benford's Law in this specific precinct and here's the data" were lumped into the exact same bucket as "The CCP built this virus to kill us all", "The vaccine will give you blood clots and myocarditis", or "The DNC rigged the election".

The "disinformation" bucket was overly large.

There was no nuance. No critical analysis of actual statements made. If it smelled even slightly off-script, it was branded and filed.

▲

BrenBarn 6 hours ago | parent [-]

But it is because of the deluge that that happens. We can only process so much information. If the amount of "content" coming through is orders of magnitude larger, it makes sense to just reject everything that looks even slightly like nonsense, because there will still be more than enough left over.

▲

themaninthedark 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

So does that justify the situation with Jimmy Kimmel? After all there was a deluge of information and a lot of unknowns about the shooter but the word choice he used was very similar to the already debunked theory that it was celebratory gunfire from a supporter.

Of course not.

	▲	netsharc 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That sentence from Kimmel was IMO factually incorrect, and he was foolish to make the claim, but how is offensive towards the dead, and why is it worth a suspension? But as we know, MAGA are snowflakes and look for anything so they can pull out their Victim Card and yell around...

▲

Slava_Propanei 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]