Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Anyway, I mostly get my news from twitter nowadays. At least there, I find it a bit easier to make sense of who is misleading me and why.

How does that make it easier to make sense of who is misleading you? Don't people on twitter have a source whose bias is unknown to you? It would be difficult to only read first person accounts of events by sources you discovered yourself. Not to mention knowing enough about those first person reporters to understand if they are misleading you or not. And if you're relying on other people (or an algorithm) to provide you sources, it feels like you'd just be adding another layer of people who can mislead you.




> How does that make it easier to make sense of who is misleading you?

Easier doesn't mean perfect – there is no such thing as perfect here – but users on Twitter tend to tell a larger story about themselves, more so than the typical newsroom reporter, and from that you have more information to gauge their thought processes.


X doesn't apply its own filter to those potentially biased reports. You can find pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel tweets. These are all suspect. What gives credence to certain points of view are the details provided. Fabrications are often shallow and when repeated offer no new insight (it's often the same tweet with little change in wording). The truth can be supported in many ways and becomes more clear as more data becomes available.

It's not that any one tweet is more accurate, it's that the collection of tweets that provide info and insight eventually steers us closer to the truth.

We don't need fact-checkers or disinformation checks. It's more useful to remove duplicate posts, low-quality posts (e.g. "Israel should bomb Gaza!!") to give us more signal to noise.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: