[ianai]

Yep, that’s what keeps me up at night. I’ve had family express their individual preference for sources with zero credibility or authority over sources from medical doctors/phds/other reputable sources. They’re predisposed to believe manipulative stuff and prefer it!

[ben_w]

This came up recently in a podcast I listen to. One point was that people start off open-minded, but if you receive only confirmatory feedback, then you not only gain a belief, but switch mode to become less curious — Without curiosity, evidence that should persuade you no longer does.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/twiml-ai-podcast-forme...

[spookybones]

There is also the phenomenon that conspiracies tend to be more interesting, and sources without credibility deal in these. And, they can pump out a lot quickly, since they do not fact check. So, more exposure overall. I know a lot of people who start out entertained by them, but soon believe them wholesale. Why read counterpoints to pizzagate when I can read even more theories about how it takes place?

[ianai]

Solipsism, man, it’s all solipsism. You’re right too.

(On an unrelated note, that’s also what made Star Trek much more interesting to me than Wars. Until pretty recently there weren’t any or only one tv show to really watch in the Wars universe. But lots of Trek.)