Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Do you go to twitter when you need an opinion on your back surgery? Or how to fix a broken tool? Or if your symptoms are covid19 or not?

They are not an arbiter of truth or an authority.



sort by: page size:

Who is disagreeing with this? The issue is that people disagree on what the facts are, so when twitter does a fact check some people would disagree, what if it's a close call?

I'm not going to agree or disagree with their assessment I don't really care. I'm saying I don't give a shit what "twitter corp" thinks about X persons tweet. I want to read it and see for myself.

Don't turn to Twitter for a medical issue... Who would do that? If you're looking in a textbook as mentioned you will find well referenced established science, or speaking to a medical professional. That is not Twitter and was never it's strength


You can accept Twitter’s not the best place for debating either of these things without taking a judgment on whether they are true or false.

No one is making Twitter an arbiter of truth. If you don't like the way Twitter does business, there are other platforms that will cater to your alternative truth needs.

Twitter isn't biased, people on twitter have opinions.

I do not accept Twitter as my authority on what is objectively factual correct.

Do you?


Yup. Twitter is not reality.

I dislike Twitter, but if the people posting there have legitimate credentials and expertise in the field, that credibility doesn't disappear just because they've chosen to talk about this on Twitter.

Twitter is discussing things, not making a sensational PR claim.

Twitter is not news.

At best, it's unfiltered information, and usually just noise and venting.


It’s true that expertise is available outside Twitter, but Twitter has been great at letting me find it. The mechanism is retweets from people I trust. Note, trust also helps distinguish bullshit from truth. I don’t know what a Javelin is, or how the war in the south is progressing, but the right journalist can find the right expert who does.

I don’t say these problems have been solved perfectly, just that they’re better than I expected.


Twitter obviously should be the ones to determine what is true and false.

Saying that twitter is the only source of truth for something usually means that this something is utterly broken... :D

Absolutely correct, thank you.

The only people on twitter who know what they’re talking about are the subset of scientific experts who happen to have a twitter account. But their papers and public press conferences are more informative than tweeting over the noise of twitter.

A really great example is the current hysteria over the “mask conspiracy theory”. A few minutes reading the WHO’s advice months ago told me more than everything people have posted since. Still, people post accusations at the WHO, apparently not even bothering to read their position.

People don’t seem to like experts, and twitter is an exaggeration of all that is irrational amongst people.


maybe don’t believe everything you read on twitter

So, Twitter should not be considered a reliable source of information, on its own?

Twitter is not credible as a primary source to start with, tweets are routinely removed when people don't get the reaction they wanted.

True, though I don't think Twitter is asking to be able to reveal information in real time.

You've never used it in a crisis situation then. I've used it to be better informed about several hurricanes near me, political developments, a possible nuclear facility problem affecting family, the Tohuku earthquake, the Macondo well blowout, and numerous other things.

Twitter has been a prime source of first-hand real-time information in many many crises. Just because you haven't used it that way doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Perhaps you should curate your feeds a bit better.


Don't use Twitter to publish that information?
next

Legal | privacy