Monitoring Text Messages for Cov19 Misinformation

mcmurtry66

Hall of Famer
Mar 14, 2019
10,678
8,529
113
I go with the good stuff - The Far Side, Calvin and Hobbes and Bloom County, along with IU sports and a bunch of Golden Retriever sites.

The oddest thing is that when my bride mentions something or looks up something she might want to buy I then start seeing things on my iPad about those items. Now, that's marketing . . .
happens to us constantly. super creepy
 

Spartans9312

All-Big Ten
Nov 11, 2004
3,128
2,275
113
I had a patient bring in a copy of a study titled "The safety of Covid-19 vaccinations- we should rethink the policy"
I made a copy and looked into the article.

The study was literally retracted because they intentionally misled on the data.
 

Joe_Hoopsier

All-Big Ten
Dec 21, 2010
4,556
1,722
113
I go with the good stuff - The Far Side, Calvin and Hobbes and Bloom County, along with IU sports and a bunch of Golden Retriever sites.

The oddest thing is that when my bride mentions something or looks up something she might want to buy I then start seeing things on my iPad about those items. Now, that's marketing . . .
You think that's creepy. When mine mentions something she might want, the freaking Fedex guy just drops it off the next damn day! I don't know how they do it.
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
12,486
16,871
113
1) Vaccines are safe and effective. People that keep spreading misinformation suggesting otherwise are bad.

2) White House shouldn't be dictating for social media companies to censor speech. Even bad speech.

If they want to provide good information that can be shared to counter? Great.

3) Fact that vaccines are safe and very effective means that those that are vaccinated don't need to spend their time freaking out about the unvaccinated. It's better that more people get vaccinated and it will reduce risk further, but it shouldn't hinder vaccinated from moving forward.

4) The truth is there is hesitancy on vaccines across the political spectrum. On the right, it is being fueled by bad actors making it seem like vaccination is something being pushed by the left. But you also have hesitancy among minority groups and elite liberals on the left. Ideally, we would be reaching out to those different hesitant groups where they are with people they trust to provide good information so they can make good decisions for themselves. That is an education campaign, not compulsion.
And there's nothing that keeps the White House from having their own social media accounts that advertise whatever they want to and call out what they think is 'misinformation' or provide meaningful information.

But no - they'd rather have Facebook and Twitter cancel you.
 

Univee2

Hall of Famer
Aug 7, 2002
14,093
4,487
113
And there's nothing that keeps the White House from having their own social media accounts that advertise whatever they want to and call out what they think is 'misinformation' or provide meaningful information.

But no - they'd rather have Facebook and Twitter cancel you.

And, then, how much of a stretch is it for a government to then tell newspapers what stories/articles to print and which to ignore, to tell publishers which books to publish and to tell networks what to cover and what to ignore?

You want Biden doing that? I don't.

You want Trump doing that? I don't.

Pravda, Tass, move over. The new generation cometh . . .
 

Spartans9312

All-Big Ten
Nov 11, 2004
3,128
2,275
113
And there's nothing that keeps the White House from having their own social media accounts that advertise whatever they want to and call out what they think is 'misinformation' or provide meaningful information.

But no - they'd rather have Facebook and Twitter cancel you.
Another thing I find rather hilarious is the same people that (rightly) give Trump credit for removing bureaucracy to ensure we got vaccines out quickly are now using that to suggest the vaccines aren't safe or weren't tested (false).

Vaccines were developed in days, then spent over half a year in trials testing efficacy. The way mRNA vaccines work means nothing is left in your system in days. Also, vaccine history tells us side effects present within months. We now have hundreds of millions of people way beyond that.
 

HooDatGuy

Senior
Sep 10, 2020
2,011
2,224
113
"if (say) a COVID19 disinformation group is blasting out misinformation on a large scale."

Would that include Fox, Newsmax, and OAN?


Interestingly enough although the US started out far ahead of Canada in terms of the speed of the vaccine rollout, Canada has actually passed the US and is on the brink of achieving herd immunity. This analysis points out the reason Canada has been so successful is that Canadian Conservatives have not endorsed the anti-vax rhetoric that Fox and OAN have propagated...

“In the U.S., news sources have become politicized in a way that has just not happened in Canada,” says Aengus Bridgman, a political scientist at McGill University in Montreal, and the lead author of a recent study on the impact of U.S. pandemic misinformation on Canadian social media users. Here, right- and left-leaning people both trust our large, important media organizations, and polarized media have been completely unsuccessful in comparison to their U.S. counterparts.

“Having that core anchor is really important during a pandemic,” Bridgman adds, “because what we find is that people who consume traditional media direct from source in the Canadian context have far fewer misperceptions, are less likely to break social distancing norms and are more likely to want to get vaccinated.”


"To get a sense of how high Canada’s full-vaccination rate might go, consider that the country has already vaccinated 80 percent of its eligible population (age 12 and older). The U.S. has vaccinated just 65 percent. This suggests that only Canada is on track to hit the kind of vaccination threshold — 75 percent or higher, according to experts — that can keep Delta and other emerging coronavirus variants from triggering serious, recurring outbreaks (and protect those who can’t receive the vaccine due to preexisting health conditions)."


Wouldn't the proliferation of successful vaccinations in Canada destroy the claims about dangerous consequences from the anti-vax crowd? Or do all of these vaccine "evils" somehow disappear when they cross the border?

The US has one of the highest vaccine hesitancy rates in the world, and Canada one of the lowest...

"Vaccine acceptance is much stronger in Canada than in the U.S. According to Morning Consult’s tracking survey of 75,000 people across 15 countries, a full 30 percent of U.S. adults say they are either unwilling to get vaccinated (19 percent) or uncertain about it (11 percent). That’s one of the highest hesitancy rates in the world — and it’s nearly double the corresponding rate in Canada, where just 11 percent are unwilling and just 6 percent are uncertain. Other polls have shown that as few as 6 percent of Canadians say they will never get vaccinated — and that nearly 90 percent want to be inoculated as soon as possible."

I wonder what the difference might be?


Canada doesn’t have the same problem. Yes, Canadian anti-vaxxers also tend to be conservative — but Canadian conservatives as a whole are far more open to vaccination than their American counterparts. According to a June Abacus poll, nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of Canadian Conservative Party voters said they were already vaccinated or planned to get a shot in short order, while just 16 percent said they would never get vaccinated — half the share of Trump voters who say the same.

Hmmmm... (and remember we also have Newsmax and OAN)...

"Today, Fox News is available in Canada only via satellite subscription or certain cable providers. It wields little influence."
Move to ****ing Canada then because the Canadiens were in the finals and no one was even allowed in the stadium. It’s a country of wimps, and if we took our lead from them we’d still have the queen on our money.
 

twenty02

Hall of Famer
Jan 28, 2011
18,121
18,101
113
That’s true, but suppression just feeds conspiracies. It does more harm than good.

I know, I'm just playing. But I'm pretty sick of all the idiots in this country, on both sides.

I don't really think there are any more idiots than there have ever been... it's just now we get to hear all their opinions way, way too much these days. And then the politicians- being politicians - respond in kind.
 

mashnut

Sophomore
Feb 22, 2018
879
1,065
93
or just ban any and all political messages. keep it truly social media. i'm on FB probably once a day for ten minutes, but it's a great way to keep up with remote family and friends and old teammates - mostly to share pictures. of all my friends on FB maybe two or three post political shit. i would imagine that's pretty representative for most. just ban those posts. i have no idea but i can't imagine banning political shit would impact FB's or IG's bottom line

Facebook cares about exactly one metric. Engagement. It's what they design the site and the app around, it's what the entire algorithmic feed is for, it's what gets them the views on the ads that make them their money. They couldn't care less about a user like you, they care about the people who spend hours a day doom scrolling, Facebook is happily trading those folks' mental health for view counts they can charge to advertisers. Political posts get engagement, particularly incendiary and controversial political posts, so Facebook has zero motivation to minimize or eliminate those. Look at any listing of the most popular posts on Facebook for any given day and you'll see what I mean.
 

mcmurtry66

Hall of Famer
Mar 14, 2019
10,678
8,529
113
Facebook cares about exactly one metric. Engagement. It's what they design the site and the app around, it's what the entire algorithmic feed is for, it's what gets them the views on the ads that make them their money. They couldn't care less about a user like you, they care about the people who spend hours a day doom scrolling, Facebook is happily trading those folks' mental health for view counts they can charge to advertisers. Political posts get engagement, particularly incendiary and controversial political posts, so Facebook has zero motivation to minimize or eliminate those. Look at any listing of the most popular posts on Facebook for any given day and you'll see what I mean.
Got it.
 

twenty02

Hall of Famer
Jan 28, 2011
18,121
18,101
113
Facebook cares about exactly one metric. Engagement. It's what they design the site and the app around, it's what the entire algorithmic feed is for, it's what gets them the views on the ads that make them their money. They couldn't care less about a user like you, they care about the people who spend hours a day doom scrolling, Facebook is happily trading those folks' mental health for view counts they can charge to advertisers. Political posts get engagement, particularly incendiary and controversial political posts, so Facebook has zero motivation to minimize or eliminate those. Look at any listing of the most popular posts on Facebook for any given day and you'll see what I mean.


Bingo.... trading pictures around of the grandkids doesn't drive people to spend hours bantering and arguing. Facebook is a shithole that makes this place look like the British parliament.

I don't use it whatsoever, other than posting pics of the kids a handful of times per year so my extended, out of state family can see them. If I could now just get my wife to disengage from the local crazy ass school moms group. Those bitches are the worst with their conspiracy bullshit.

The only thing postive about FB is I've made a shitload of money off their stock the last 7-8 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312

HooDatGuy

Senior
Sep 10, 2020
2,011
2,224
113
Facebook cares about exactly one metric. Engagement. It's what they design the site and the app around, it's what the entire algorithmic feed is for, it's what gets them the views on the ads that make them their money. They couldn't care less about a user like you, they care about the people who spend hours a day doom scrolling, Facebook is happily trading those folks' mental health for view counts they can charge to advertisers. Political posts get engagement, particularly incendiary and controversial political posts, so Facebook has zero motivation to minimize or eliminate those. Look at any listing of the most popular posts on Facebook for any given day and you'll see what I mean.
Reality is the scale of the these platforms is such that Psaki and the gang whining about a couple posts is likely a drop in the bucket.

Zuckerberg is smarter than the entire west wing put together, he know’s that if he makes the humanoids feel listened to and takes down a few posts for them, they’ll leave him alone legislatively.
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,976
4,005
113
I know, I'm just playing. But I'm pretty sick of all the idiots in this country, on both sides.

I don't really think there are any more idiots than there have ever been... it's just now we get to hear all their opinions way, way too much these days. And then the politicians- being politicians - respond in kind.
We didn't have that problem when this board had Thread View.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark

stollcpa

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 26, 2010
14,482
13,018
113
I said the govt needs a warrant to read anyone's texts (meaning obtaining one from a court, which means some probable cause).... they can't just be reading private text msgs in mass.

I have no idea what.... if anything... this possible policy is about. It wasn't a govt statement or even a quote from anyone. And maybe was just poorly written or totally misunderstood by the writer.

All just guessing.... my guess is that it had something to do with robo-texting (spam)....

What I'm 1000% sure of is the Biden admin isn't actively monitoring an entire nation's text messages and then telling a Politico reporter we're doing so.

Some common sense would be nice, but this is the WC after all.
No such thing as a 1,000%. 100% is the max.
 

VanPastorMan

Hall of Famer
Mar 21, 2002
15,754
3,408
113
Central Pennsylvania Via Washington Indiana
That's wasn't the intent of the Patriot Act, but as we saw with Russia Russia Russia and the bogus FISA warrants, Democrats have turned it into their own secret police.
For years I have read or listened to articles,books, and videos about the Mob ie Organized Crime. The government had a legal devise which was created by G Robert Blakey called The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act or RICO for short. This Act made it so the government could go after Cosa Nostra and any other Organized Crime Syndicate. Rudolph Giuliani used it very well to take down much of the Five Families of New York in 1986. For years the bosses of these families were insulated from legal trouble because they never robbed a bank, sold a drug, or turned out a girl. It was their underlings who were liable by the law. RICO made it so you could go after the organization and jail bosses because you could prove they were the leaders. All of this was good.
In the early 90's Operation Rescue lead by Randall Terry would protest abortion in the front of clinics. The government used RICO to put Terry in prison because somebody in the organization did something illegal. This is an example of government power once given can be used in an unjust way. Nobody should think that there is a comparison to Cosa Nostra and Operation Rescue. We must be very careful when we give up rights or give the government power they should not have. The Patriot Act you cited is another example. It was brought about because we were attacked in 2001. But now it can be used against the American People.
 

VanPastorMan

Hall of Famer
Mar 21, 2002
15,754
3,408
113
Central Pennsylvania Via Washington Indiana
Here's another example: "Just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me."
We only have a small amount of evidence that the last election was stolen by the Democrats. In my Pennsylvania there many irregularities in Philly such as votes being counted without the watchers being around. In Michigan votes were,"found" and almost all of them were for Biden. My evidence is anecdotal. There is no way anyone will convince me that Joe Biden a guy who barely left his basement is more popular than Barack Obama. You can't convince me that Donald Trump would get 10 million more votes in 20 than 16 and he would lose. This mail in voting was probably the way the Democrats stole the election. Maybe they had Russian help?
 

mcmurtry66

Hall of Famer
Mar 14, 2019
10,678
8,529
113
We only have a small amount of evidence that the last election was stolen by the Democrats. In my Pennsylvania there many irregularities in Philly such as votes being counted without the watchers being around. In Michigan votes were,"found" and almost all of them were for Biden. My evidence is anecdotal. There is no way anyone will convince me that Joe Biden a guy who barely left his basement is more popular than Barack Obama. You can't convince me that Donald Trump would get 10 million more votes in 20 than 16 and he would lose. This mail in voting was probably the way the Democrats stole the election. Maybe they had Russian help?
Exhausting. Had nothing to do with biden being more popular than Obama. The election was a referendum on trump. More people came out to vote for and against trump.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
57,880
31,071
113
Margaritaville
We only have a small amount of evidence that the last election was stolen by the Democrats. In my Pennsylvania there many irregularities in Philly such as votes being counted without the watchers being around. In Michigan votes were,"found" and almost all of them were for Biden. My evidence is anecdotal. There is no way anyone will convince me that Joe Biden a guy who barely left his basement is more popular than Barack Obama. You can't convince me that Donald Trump would get 10 million more votes in 20 than 16 and he would lose. This mail in voting was probably the way the Democrats stole the election. Maybe they had Russian help?
You're a partisan hack, and your not very smart, so none of this is surprising.
 

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,237
10,870
113
I know, I'm just playing. But I'm pretty sick of all the idiots in this country, on both sides.

I don't really think there are any more idiots than there have ever been... it's just now we get to hear all their opinions way, way too much these days. And then the politicians- being politicians - respond in kind.
It’s the worst part of social media. The ignorant claim they’ve done their own research and it supports their beliefs. First, they didn’t do any actual “research,” they don’t know how to do research. Second, actual research done by experts that know how to do research doesn’t support their ignorant beliefs. The Jerry Springer Show used to make me sad about the stupid and ignorant in the country, now social media is The Jerry Springer Show.
 

mcmurtry66

Hall of Famer
Mar 14, 2019
10,678
8,529
113
It’s the worst part of social media. The ignorant claim they’ve done their own research and it supports their beliefs. First, they didn’t do any actual “research,” they don’t know how to do research. Second, actual research done by experts that know how to do research doesn’t support their ignorant beliefs. The Jerry Springer Show used to make me sad about the stupid and ignorant in the country, now social media is The Jerry Springer Show.
Research and support is now “links and polls” to articles from from huff post to Fox News. That’s not research. We see it all over this board
 

Crayfish57

Junior
Sep 18, 2013
1,325
1,401
113
It is hard to match the popularity of a man who Gallup says has been the most admired man in all the world, for 12 years in a row now. Sometimes I regret that I never voted for him.
Our world is in sad need of heros then. I'd be willing to bet even if that is true he is also the or one of the most despised as well. I wouldnt lose any sleep over not voting for that POS
 

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,237
10,870
113
Our world is in sad need of heros then. I'd be willing to bet even if that is true he is also the or one of the most despised as well. I wouldnt lose any sleep over not voting for that POS
McCain and Romney both would have been good Presidents. They very well didn’t win because many of today’s Trump supporters didn’t vote for them.
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
12,486
16,871
113
McCain and Romney both would have been good Presidents. They very well didn’t win because many of today’s Trump supporters didn’t vote for them.
Oh, now it's Trump's fault McCain and Romney lost.

How about GHW Bush? Was it Trump's fault he didn't win re-election?

Give me a break.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
57,880
31,071
113
Margaritaville
McCain and Romney both would have been good Presidents. They very well didn’t win because many of today’s Trump supporters didn’t vote for them.
McCain was the nominee in a very bad year to be the Republican nominee. Romney damaged his own campaign enough without outside help.

But you probably have a point. I will never forget that town hall when NcCain politely chastised a potential voter for claiming she didn't trust Obama because he was an Arab and a Muslim. I don't know if she ended up voting for McCain, anyway, but I have little problem imagining she gleefully voted for Trump.