I think you raise interesting points. A few thoughts (which are again more like my views rather than āwhat the research saysā):
I agree that something like the general trustworthiness of the environment also matters. And it seems good to me to both increase the proportion of reliable to unreliable messages one receives and to make people better able to spot unreliable messages and avoid updating (incorrectly) on them and to make people better able to update on correct messages. (Though Iām not sure how tractable any of those things are.)
I agree that it seems like a major risk from proliferation of misinformation, fake news, etc., is that people stop seeking out or updating on info in general, rather than just that they update incorrectly on the misinfo. But I wouldnāt say that thatās āthe real problem with fake newsā; Iād say thatās a real problem, but that updating on the misinfo is another real problem (and Iām not sure which is bigger).
As a minor thing, I think when people spread misinfo, someone else updates on it, and then the world more generally gets worse due to voting for stupid policies or whatever, thatās also an externality. (The actions taken caused harm to people who werenāt involved in the original ātransactionā.)
I agree you can fool/āmislead people without lies. You can use faulty arguments, cherry-picking, fairly empty rhetoric that āfeelsā like it points a certain way, etc.
I think you raise interesting points. A few thoughts (which are again more like my views rather than āwhat the research saysā):
I agree that something like the general trustworthiness of the environment also matters. And it seems good to me to both increase the proportion of reliable to unreliable messages one receives and to make people better able to spot unreliable messages and avoid updating (incorrectly) on them and to make people better able to update on correct messages. (Though Iām not sure how tractable any of those things are.)
I agree that it seems like a major risk from proliferation of misinformation, fake news, etc., is that people stop seeking out or updating on info in general, rather than just that they update incorrectly on the misinfo. But I wouldnāt say that thatās āthe real problem with fake newsā; Iād say thatās a real problem, but that updating on the misinfo is another real problem (and Iām not sure which is bigger).
As a minor thing, I think when people spread misinfo, someone else updates on it, and then the world more generally gets worse due to voting for stupid policies or whatever, thatās also an externality. (The actions taken caused harm to people who werenāt involved in the original ātransactionā.)
I agree you can fool/āmislead people without lies. You can use faulty arguments, cherry-picking, fairly empty rhetoric that āfeelsā like it points a certain way, etc.