• crispy_caesus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I like the idea of not letting stupid people spread misinformation on the internet (unless it’s myself), but this is just gatekeeping the right to speak out in public about certain topics which I find deeply problematic.

  • amateurcrastinator@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Is this really true? I cast suspicion because to me it sounds like they are trying to convince the world that whatever comes out of their influencers about the topics they are interested to push is of higher quality than the rest of the world.

    Oh the media keeps reporting that there are human rights abuse going on some place remote. Those are obvious lies because our double MBA PhD influencer is quite clear that everyone is happy.

    Yes it would be nice if only knowledgeable people spoke on complex subjects in a language that allows less knowledgeable people to understand. But one has to be able to trust what is being said.

  • xep@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    I don’t think we’d lose anything of value even if we banned all influencers from speaking online on social media on any topic, so I can see why China’s done this.

  • Bunbury@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I get that you don’t want misinformation happening on certain topics. The scary part comes when you’re going to decide to police it. Can you still share info on the health journey of you or your loved one? Can you still ask people to buy your products that are meant to save more money in the long run than they cost? Can you tell people you had a bad experience with a certain bank? Not a fan of the approach, but I do understand the basic concept of why they’d want to do something.

  • Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Personally I’d like to see a total global ban of social media.

    Humans aren’t designed to communicate with this many people at once, and it shows.

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    This is quintessential “Modern CPP”

    Take a real problem screwing up the western world bad (like influencer mis/disinformation), and smash it in a way only their massive state apparatus can…

    Superficially.

    It’s “proof” their party line works and, as always, a good way to control the populace, if abused. It’s probably effective, but not as effective as it appears on the surface.


    I’m sympathetic here.

    In past years I was a “free internet” libertarian leaning diehard, but something has to be done about algos boosting shameless outrage peddlers; it’s literally destroying the planet and our collective psyche, just for short term corporate benefit (Or corpo-state benefit in China’s case, as its “Big Tech” is under the party’s thumb). But China just took the problem and used it as an excuse for more control.

    • Comrade_Spood@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The issue is our society encourages it. When the most important thing in life is money, people are gonna do shit like this to exploit others. Take away the possibility of profit for grifting people and the incentive to do this drops. Would it completely go away? No, there will always be stupid grifters striving to gain popularity or attention, but I think that without the monetary factor it would be a negligible presence.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        19 hours ago

        I don’t agree. Tons of folks spend tons of time influencing for basically no financial gain (or the platform taking the vast majority of it). Attention is everything.

        In other cases, people are just tribal, and like following someone.

        That’s always been (and will always be) an issue, but the monster of this story is engagement optimizing design. Technology has made this human tendency extremly dangerous, and “engagement at any cost” needs to be a social taboo.

  • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I can see how this would play out in the states. First you make it so only degreed people can talk about certain things. Then you dismiss them as educated elite ivory tower academics. Because we live in a nation that scorns experience and expertise.

    Someone asked for an example the other day of something that didn’t believe was true and I listed seven. They dismissed me with “I didn’t ask for an encyclopedia.” It was the best way they could ignore that someone knew more than them and not have to actually process the information they explicitly asked for.

      • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        But then you can’t claim to be fighting the system against all those academics. You lose credibility once you have credentials, even diploma mill ones.

    • frunch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Sounds like they thought they could just argue on easy mode by putting the burden of proof on you. When you accommodated their request, that blew up their spot. Having no other recourse, they retreated to an insult since there was nothing else for them to do (but they were seething to get the last word, so you got that response).

      Good on ya for making the fucker squirm.

      • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I know that there is absolutely zero chance of educating some that doesn’t want to learn. But I also know that online others are reading and those people are either looking for information they can use in future conversations or they don’t have a vested interest in the conversation and can be reached even if they don’t poke their heads up to be seen.

        • frunch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          20 hours ago

          That’s 100% the reason I’ll bother with these idiots when i do. Sometimes it’s also a chance for me to further prove out my logic and refine my arguments and understanding of the topic as well, so it can be a win-win-win in the best case scenario (troll proven wrong+me learning something new/refining my knowledge+bystanders learning why the troll is wrong)

  • AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think the main focus here should be the word “influencers”.

    One thing is for a relatively unknown person to speak about any kind of topic even if they know nothing about it.

    But when someone with millions of followers spreads misinfo, that is dangerous as it can end up killing lots of people.

    People with a certain amount of followers should be held accountable for what they say the same way that a newspaper should.

    • shani66@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There’s a lot of nuance to be discussed and Republicans shouldn’t be in the room at all when it is, but yeah this is objectively true. We used to have laws regulating the news for a reason.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      18 hours ago

      If we held news accountable for misinformation then fox and all the other fascist networks wouldn’t even exist.

    • methylphenidate@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Yeah I gotta agree with you on this, there’s a frankly insane amount of pull these people have in society and as we saw during the pandemic not only did it cause people to endanger their own health, but those of others around them.

    • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      21 hours ago

      sure, but that’s not what this is doing. it doesn’t say they’ll be held accountable. it just places a high barrier to entry.

      i understand the sentiment behind it, but I don’t think this will be effective at curtailing disinformation. it would, however, be a very useful tool for controlling online speech. especially with a government that has so much control over its universities.

    • Novaling@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Yeah, I think if it’s more about policing the misinformation influencers spread, then I can calm down a bit, although it still makes me nervous to think about the government picking and choosing what a person with a crowd can say.

      For now, it’s making sure influencers don’t spread anti-vax bullshit, but what if tomorrow it’s no talking about Palestine?

      Even then, medical professionals themselves can fall to propaganda and spread lies, so we can’t use a single person as an arbiter of truth.

  • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    19 hours ago

    There’s no shortage of bad faith influencers who have degrees and misinform anyway. Such laws shouldn’t be centered on pressuring people into expensive educational programs. They should focus on outlawing claims that are demonstrably false and harmful.

    • village604@adultswim.fan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      I’d imagine the number of people with degrees who are confidently incorrect on the subject of their major is much smaller than those without a formal education.

      While I don’t agree with China’s tactics, something needs to be done about people like Joe Rogan peddling harmful misinformation to millions of people.

    • quetzaldilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      I once worked for a CPA who asked me what a balance sheet was for.

      He was from a wealthy Tibetan family dynasty and clearly paid his way into the industry, but who knows why he would choose to do that because he clearly was completely over his head.

      We used to call him Michael Scott sans charisma.

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Yikes

    It’s incredible that despite how shit the US has become It’s still a better place than 1984 land

    A real communist country would have a UBI that doesn’t pressure people to become scammers and grifters, just to make a wage in a shit economy with little financial opportunities.

    • 鳳凰院 凶真 (Hououin Kyouma)@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Its so funny to see people fleeing the US, meanwhile my maternal grandmother from China has a US naturalization oath ceremony like next week.

      Jumping from one burning pot to another is so awkward, but objectively speaking, it’s still a slight improvement.