Every fortnight I curate some of the observations and insights that were shared on social media. I call these Friday’s Finds.
@white_owly — “Symptoms love dressing up as causes. And causes love hiding behind them.”
“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” —Victor E. Frankl, via @euan
“In a warm information war, the human mind is the territory. If you aren’t a combatant, you are the territory. And once a combatant wins over a sufficient number of minds, they have the power to influence culture and society, policy and politics … What made democracies strong in the past — a strong commitment to free speech and the free exchange of ideas — makes them profoundly vulnerable in the era of democratized propaganda and rampant misinformation … The solution to this problem requires collective responsibility among military, intelligence, law enforcement, researchers, educators, and platforms. Creating a new and functional defensive framework requires cooperation.”
Study: It only takes a few seconds for bots to spread misinformation —
Just six percent of bots on Twitter accounted for 31 percent of bad information.
“That’s why the Indiana study emphasized the critical role played by so-called ‘influencers’: celebrities and others with large Twitter followings who can contribute to the spread of bad information via retweets—especially if the content reaffirms a target group’s preexisting beliefs (confirmation bias). Menczer and his colleagues found evidence of a class of bots that deliberately targeted influential people on Twitter. Those people then ‘get the impression that a lot of people are talking about or sharing a particular article, and that may lower their guard and lead them to reshare or believe it,’ said Menczer. He calls it the ‘useful idiot’ paradigm.”
“For any structured analysis of the future, we need to understand on the one hand trends and driving forces, and on the other critical uncertainties. There has been extensive discussion of the forces shaping the future of work, but I don’t believe there has been sufficient critical analysis of the uncertainties.”