Now you may think that you can tell if something is real or fake but the lines are getting more blurred everyday. Photoshop has been trolling the internet for years but now we have something even more sinister on the horizon. Meet VOCO by Adobe.
This changes the game! Going forward we won't even be able to trust the spoken words we are hearing online. This system can edit and replicate voices. With just a short amount of speech VOCO can compile whatever it wants your voice to say.
What if someone wanted to use this technology against you? They could easily record you speaking and then make you say whatever they want in a file. Then it is your word against your word. Can you imagine the lawsuits?
If we thought fakes news was rampant on the internet today, imagine what we will be dealing with in a few short years!
This idea comes from medicine and virology where exposing the body to a weakened version of the virus allows it to build a tolerance. The point is to tell lies and expose them as lies, not to tell lies as if they were truth.
Social psychologists researching
fakenews have come up with a strategy published in the journal Global Challenges. They want to inoculate the public against misinformation, specifically the
fake news websites such as those they deem to be propagating myths about climate change.
Previous research has shown that counteracting politicization of science can be done through high-level consensus forming among experts to convey the reality, yet other research indicates that public opinion on climate change to shaped with limited external validity. The current research wants to explore how people evaluating process consensus information while they are in a polarized information environment.
In order to get people to address climate change, people will need to change their behaviors and how they make decisions in life. Researchers and scientists see a problem through the increased politicization of climate science and the attempts by certain disinformation campaigns to undermine the
scientific consensus. Researchers wanted to identify an effective way to engage the public about issues across the political spectrum.
In presenting facts followed by misinformation, the false material cancels out the previous accurate statement in people's minds and end up back where they started. Lies canceled out the facts. Researchers decided to add some misinformation to the delivery of their own facts through distortion tactics used by other groups. For some reason, this helps shift and hold people's opinion closer to the truth when follow-up exposure to
fake news was introduced.
Lead author, Sander van der Linden, has a poignant statement to make about being influenced by falsity (as I talk about in my own work):
Misinformation can be sticky, spreading and replicating like a virus.
Once falsity takes root in our consciousness, we can become attached to it and it becomes a mind virus that we unknowingly spread to other consciousnesses through the words we use to influence them into accepting the mind virus.
By injecting a small amount of misinformation, this acts as a vaccine that preemptively exposes people and warns them, although subconsciously, about the misinformation and helps them to preserve the facts. The idea is that a cognitive repertoire is built up that acts as a resistance to misinformation and reduces susceptibility to accepting it the next time it is encountered.
To determine how opinion shifted, 2000 participants from various ages and political views were shown a website that alleged 31,000 scientists had signed a petition saying there was no evidence of human caused carbon dioxide release leading to global climate change. There was also the alternative accurate statement that 97% of U.S. scientists agree on man-made climate change.
Participants there were only shown the climate change consensus showed an increased agreement with the scientific consensus by about 20%. Those were shown misinformation alone resulted in a 9% drop in accepting the scientific consensus. Other participants were shown the accurate information followed by the false petition and there was neither an increase or a drop in accepting the scientific consensus. Conflicting messages can leave people unsure of what is what and is brings them back to square one where they started of not knowing what was what.
Two groups were given the information vaccine of a general correction of the false data, this showed a 6.5% increase in acceptance towards the scientific consensus, despite exposure to fake news. A more detailed correction served as an inoculation to achieve a 13% increase in acceptance.
The misinformation was not presented as information, but was demonstrated to be false through either general or more specifically detailed corrections, which sowed seeds of doubt and undermined the claims. Tobacco, fossil fuel and chemical companies have long used psychological inoculation to undermine scientific facts in the public consciousness. The same process can be reversed to promote facts instead.
In looking at Republicans, Independents and Democrats, inoculation messages were all equally effective in shifting their opinions to be consistent with climate science conclusions. The normal backfire effect where people reject information did not occur when inoculation messages were used. Including the misinformation in the presentation of facts helps to preemptively warn people against the spread of misinformation that can influence them into accepting falsity.
Changing minds is indeed hard, as I recently posted.
There will always be people completely resistant to change, but we tend to find there is room for most people to change their minds, even just a little.
Upvoting , Sharing or Reblogging below.
Much of the world is now aware of what has been termed “fake news” by many different media online, in actual physical newspapers printed on paper you can hold, and on the radio and TV.
We are now being told there is such things a “alternative facts” by the US Press Secretary in an effort to explain away the fact that there were notably fewer attendee’s at Donald Trump’s (first) Inauguration than were at Barrack Obama’s (first) Inauguration.
So we have “fake News” and “alternative facts”, are they not both the same thing?
News is usually taken to be factual, facts are indisputably true. If it is not true it cannot be a fact. Something that is a fact is something that is true.
Now we have this new thing to talk about, the “alternative fact” The very idea that it is alternative suggests that it is something else, something that is not in a fact a fact.
Alternatives are very often something good, but an “alternative fact” is not something good, it is something not true, non factual and is in fact a lie.
Do I dare say that people who tell “alternative facts” are liars, no.
Do I dare say people who tell “fake news” are liars, yes.
Are “fake news” and “alternative facts" the same, YES.
Why is the US Press Secretary spreading fake news and alternative facts?
Any comments are welcome and appreciated. Agree? Disagree?
Do you want to write a good story and build your reputation here on Steemit? I will give some general tips in this article that researchers and news agencies use every day. If you follow these they will help you to become a trustworthy source of information with a solid reputation here on Steemit.
Never before have we had such choice and freedom of where to get our news, our information or how to contribute to the collective knowledge of society. In years gone by there were the the papers, the radio and Universities. You had to be a reporter or an academic to contribute to public knowledge. The elite that controlled the information supply was certainly not open to the public, apart from one or two letters to the editor that made the backpages each week.
In 2017 we are living in a very different age. Anyone can contribute. Knowledge and news is now in your hands. This power comes with responsibility. In this post I will give some practical tips for posting solid articles. Good practice will keep your content top quality and your reputation intact. It's up to you to make the posts interesting though :)
Since I have come across Steemit I have generally been blown away by the quality of the content here. People go to great lengths to research topics and to write and edit great stories. This amazing platform has a diverse array of articles; fiction, news, science, politics, art. There is so much posted on Steemit that you would never imagine being posted on Facebook or the like. Its building to be an exciting platform with potential to be a trustworthy source of news and a place where you also can come and learn. Just check out some of @sirwincherters posts https://steemit.com/@sirwinchester. Amazing stuff.
So what separates good articles from just good stories or click-bait? How can you trust what you are reading? Is it real or fake news? or worse propaganda?
The following practical tips will give gravitas to your articles and keep your reputation intact.
Getting comments from people or reaching out to senior members of Steemit may take time but if nothing else it gives you a chance to clean up your thoughts and put them together in a brief synopsis. If your messaging a Whale to ask about their opinion on an issue your going to give them the short version. This frequently helps me rewrite my story and break it down to the key points.
Linking and citing articles also gives you a chance to recheck your facts. On top of that it also saves you so much time. If someone comments on your article you can just point them to your source. It saves arguments and lets people confirm details and form opinions on what you have written.
Even mainstream news agencies have begun to try to tackle fake news. The BBC are seting up a team to tackle fake news,
to fact check and debunk deliberately misleading and false stories masquerading as real news.
Storyful is one company which many news agencies are using to validate news to
to try to keep those operations from embarrassing themselves online.
Thank you for reading this. I write on Steemit about Blockchain, Cryptocurrency, Travel and lots of random topics.
Images have been sourced from https://pixabay.com, Steemit logo from @stino-san