Do you think there is a symmetrical obligation for people writing positive things about vaccines? If vaccines were in fact not safe or effective then promoting them would also be very harmful.
You’re trying to reason from first principles without factoring in people’s cognitive biases. In a world without cognitive biases, a symmetrical obligation towards “communication seriousnesses” makes sense.
However, I suspect when I give the concrete example of vaccines above, you actually agree with the statement, because your brain is factoring in the negativity bias that exists towards vaccines.
Just to make this more concrete: an incredible amount of work is done to ensure vaccines are safe, and that people trust them. But a handful of viral social media posts can erode people’s confidence. In this world, a symmetrical obligation does not make sense.
Do you think there is a symmetrical obligation for people writing positive things about vaccines? If vaccines were in fact not safe or effective then promoting them would also be very harmful.
You’re trying to reason from first principles without factoring in people’s cognitive biases. In a world without cognitive biases, a symmetrical obligation towards “communication seriousnesses” makes sense.
However, I suspect when I give the concrete example of vaccines above, you actually agree with the statement, because your brain is factoring in the negativity bias that exists towards vaccines.
Just to make this more concrete: an incredible amount of work is done to ensure vaccines are safe, and that people trust them. But a handful of viral social media posts can erode people’s confidence. In this world, a symmetrical obligation does not make sense.
Edit: added last paragraph.