There will always be misinformation "hot spots" the big difference between private messaging apps and Facebook is the private apps are not:<p>- actively recommending new groups for me to join<p>- actively trying to acquire my attention<p>- actively trying to get me to consume incendiary content<p>Instead they're trying to help me communicate with people This removes the "attractor function" of the really bad content and protects average people who aren't aware of or equipped to deal with misinformation. I dont have the correct stat in front of me by a large percentage of people that join QAnon groups on facebook do so b/c facebook recommended the group to them.<p>Most people are not going out of their way to find this content, its being shoved at them by algorithms.
Alternative title:<p>"Should laypeople even be allowed to talk to each other? Perhaps we, media pundits who purvey only valid informattion (like WMDs or the Steele dossier) should only be allowed to do the talking"
"Next"? There have sensationalist news articles about people doing Bad Things™ on WhatsApp for ages. It turns out that some people have bad intentions, and they are going to communicate.<p>This is such a pointless and uninsightful article.
>BRIAN I confess that I am worried about Telegram. Other than private messaging, people love to use Telegram for group chats — up to 200,000 people can meet inside a Telegram chat room. That seems problematic.<p>How about fuck you, BRIAN?
The NY Times is the single biggest hot spot of misinformation and has been for decades. I wish so much that they set their own house in order before criticizing others, but alas in an industry propped up by advertising and subscriptions, catering to your audience is more important than journalistic integrity.