NYPD never heard about this radical notion of the “First Amendment” apparently.
Social media enables anyone to become an “expert” on any topic. Is this a good thing?
Facebook loses all access to its own internal iOS apps after Apple revokes Facebook’s developer enterprise certificate for having violated Apple’s terms of service, using the certificate to install a market research (in this case, spying/privacy violating) app on research participants’ devices.
Journalism today: “If you want your story to be well placed and if you want to be professionally rewarded, you have to generate page views — you have to incite social media. The way to do that is to reinforce the prejudices of your readers.”
Glassdoor is a web site where workers write reviews of their employer and work environment. Not surprisingly, many companies are gaming the system, flooding it with 5-star reviews.
435 Congressional Representatives were elected last November. How many can you name? Probably not many. But you can probably name Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez due to the media’s odd fixation on her with non-stop saturation coverage. Why has the media singled out one Representative for saturation coverage – and largely ignores the other 434 Representatives?
Simple example of “cherry picking” use in propaganda messaging.
Social media is the new battleground. It’s being used to push people over the edge, to threaten violence against others, and in some cases, leading to actual violence. A controversial video clip that spread online in the past day was pushed by what appears to have been a fake account.
Facebook employees write 5-star reviews of Facebook products sold on Amazon.
In 2012, an editor for The Oregonian newspaper died of a heart attack. The paper printed his obituary citing his wonderful career, awards and track record. Left out of the story was the married editor died in the arms of his prostitute, a fact which another editor deliberately covered up.
Russian trolls ran a social media campaign to encourage votes for Jill Stein for president in 2016.
The surprising observation that “medium confidence” in a scientific finding means we have no confidence at all and high confidence means we have only moderate evidence and medium consensus.
CNN botches percentages and numbers. Big time.
CNBC re-runs a photo of 2013 to illustrate a story, and the item they are illustrating is not even true in 2019. They never mention this, which makes this a fictional news report. Seriously, who in media cares about accuracy? Anyone? Hello?