Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.
Spinach is full of iron. We only use 10% of our brain power. Man never landed on the moon. Vaccines cause autism. They’re eating the cats. You have an influencer friend, Fred. He tells you that he has discovered that he can reach more people and make more money if he just stops checking whether things are true before he shares them with his audience. What would you think of Fred? Is it morally wrong if he doesn’t create the misinformation himself, but just passes it along to those who have chosen to listen to him? Haven’t we all been guilty of repeating common misconceptions at some point? Can we hold one person morally accountable for repeating reports of pet consumption in Springfield, but give another a pass for inflicting spinach on their children at every meal? As Gina Rushton reports , Meta has now taken a position on this ethical dilemma. Where in 2021 it celebrated “industry leading” fact-checking, it recently announced the ...
Comments
Post a Comment