[plank_time]

Exactly. What is misinformation? What you define as misinformation right now could be information in a few months.

Entire discussions on things like ivermectin to treat covid were banned from YouTube as “misinformation”. Now some studies are coming out that might show that it’s not. At least it deserves a discussion but it has been censored as misinformation. So we lost an entire year of treating people around the world because SOMEONE deemed ivermectin misinformation??

What about the Wuhan lab origination? Last year that was derided as conspiracy theories and misinformation, but now it’s basically accepted as fact.

Who determines what is misinformation? What if Trump wins again or someone worse like Tom Cotton? And they set up a government panel that they decide is misinformation and companies like Google need to follow it? Who determines who is spreading misinformation now?

10 years ago a low fat diet was deemed “heart healthy”. Now that is classified as misinformation. Should low fat diets be censored by Google?

This is the problem. What you thought was misinformation is only really a few studies away from being flipped around.

[read_if_gay_]

> What you thought was misinformation is only really a few studies away from being flipped around.

To be clear, that matters because by censoring "misinformation" you are killing these studies, therefore we are by definition stuck wherever we are right now.

New science and "misinformation" as defined by our digital overlords intersect.

[deadpannini]

> This is the problem. What you thought was misinformation is only really a few studies away from being flipped around.

The big tech companies are destroying the value and credibility of our information ecosystems, by treating the first draft of history and science like it's the last. The day after an event [0], elite opinion becomes "information" and anything that contradicts that is "misinformation."

[0] I meant this as a slightly comical overstatement, but in many cases it's quite literal.