Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

asbruckman OP t1_iw796lm wrote

Table 2 in the paper is helpful to understand the groups. It says:

  • Reason to disagree: trust snopes: no (but trust other fact checkers); knew misinfo: no
  • Changed belief: trust snopes: yes; knew misinfo: no
  • Non-standard belief: trust snopes: no (and don't trust any fact checkers); knew misinfo: no
  • Sharing to debunk: trust snopes: yes; knew misinfo: yes
  • Sharing for humor: trust snopes: yes; knew misinfo: yes
35

WoNc t1_iw7fdyv wrote

How confident are you that there is a real difference between RD and SBF? It does not seem obvious to me that there is a significant difference between distrusting fact checkers generally for reasons like believing they're politically biased (as in SBF) and rejecting wide swaths of fact checkers for similar reasons in favor of a few that generally agree with what the person already believes (which is within the confines of RD). It doesn't seem like that usage of fact checkers by RD is substantially different than their initial belief formation where they simply regurgitate memes that make appealing and convenient claims.

10

asbruckman OP t1_iw7o1p4 wrote

Great question. Confident. The RD folks said things like “Snopes is biased,” and the PFB folks said things like “I see you have succumbed to the globalist conspiracy.”

SD was more like “this is self evidently ridiculous—can you believe people buy into garbage like this?” They didn’t say “this is false” because they believe that omg their readers know it’s false.

26