• DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      1 year ago

      So "misinformation" is just incorrect information being spread. "disinformation" is deliberately spreading wrong information with the intent to deceive.

      "malinformation" is correct information that goes against the US government line. So educating people on the context of a historical event or geopolitics, but doing so in a way the US government doesn't approve of, is "malinformation." They're literally trying to reframe educating people as a potential crime. It's some fucked up shit.

      And that other guy is talking about US politics where they accused "malinformation" of being one of the main reasons Clinton lost (i.e. people were informed that she is a horrific ghoul of a politician responsible for the destruction of Libya and that made people not want to vote for her.) They of course blamed this on "the Russians" as they do, because the US ruling class doesn't want their citizens to live in reality.

      • flan [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        i have honestly never seen anyone use the word malinformation before today but i appreciate your explanation. Very strange that the other person was refusing to explain wtf they were talking about, normally people are eager to explain things they care about.

        • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think they may have been hung up on the word "discourse" there and assumed that you were up to speed with the terms, but not the conversation about them.

          Though I really don't get their "big ball of wax" comment, it really isn't hard to say "the US government tries to manipulate people at home and abroad through manipulation of information and language."

      • flan [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Are you talking about people blaming russia for clinton's loss and election interference? Phrasing this stuff as "the mis- dis- mal-information discourse" makes it sound like there are a bunch of people arguing about the definitions of those things on twitter.

        Your post comes across as needlessly hostile here. Instead of calling me ignorant and dropping a wikipedia link for a thing that existed for 4 months try explaining yourself.

        • davel [he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m sorry but I don’t know how to summarize this long, winding current in American socio-media-politics of the last six years in a Lemmy comment. It’s just too big a ball of wax, and I’m not up for it.

          • flan [they/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            And so you thought "the mis- dis- mal-information discourse" would be the way people would understand what you're talking about and what it is Taibbi has exposed?

            • davel [he/him]
              ·
              1 year ago

              The people who are familiar with it will, and the people who aren’t obviously won’t. Same as in town. I don’t know what you’re trying to do, browbeat me into being your personal thing-explainer?

              • flan [they/them]
                ·
                1 year ago

                I mean you're on a public message board and you clearly have A Thing you care about, so maybe in the interest of promoting that Thing you should explain it?

                • davel [he/him]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’ve brought them up before in posts & messages on hexbear and lemmy.ml and lemmygrad.ml and Mastodon, and I’m sure I will again.

                  I think it matters because the push to control social media has expanded to include all of the imperial West, and they are aware of the fediverse and are going to come for us:
                  Atlantic Council report: Scaling Trust on the Web: Annex 5: Collective Security in a Federated World (PDF)