- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
Kate Starbird says attacks have made research difficult, and claims of bias arise because of prevalence of lies from the right
A key researcher in the fight against election misinformation – who herself became the subject of an intensive misinformation campaign – has said her field gets accused of “bias” precisely because it’s now mainly rightwingers who spread the worst lies.
Kate Starbird, co-founder of the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, added that she feared that the entirely false story of rigged elections has now “sunk in” for many Americans on the right. “The idea that they’re already going to the polls with the belief that they’re being cheated means they’ll misinterpret everything they see through that lens,” she said.
Starbird’s group partnered with Stanford Internet Observatory on the Election Integrity Partnership ahead of the 2020 elections – a campaign during which a flood of misinformation swirled around the internet, with daily claims of unproven voter fraud.
Starbird and her team helped document that flood, and in return congressional Republicans and conservative attorneys attacked her research, alleging it amounted to censorship and violated the first amendment.
You must log in or register to comment.
Its insane politicians are allowed to just spout bullshit. Its even more insane we’re wrestling with this mud snake instead of banishing it from our supposed enlightened institutions of man.
no amount of fact checking will help people stupid enough to think Trump should serve in public office
It’s true. Even in the comments on this post there’s someone adamantly claiming (without evidence) that masks don’t work, despite being presented with a full literature review of studies showing that they do work.
It shouldn’t even take a full scientific study to convince someone that covering their nose and mouth helps to prevent the spread of airborne illness. Their egos are so fragile that any critical introspective examination of their viewpoints would destroy their entire identity. What even are they without their vitriol and hatred for the truth?
What even are they without their vitriol and hatred for the truth?
constantly full of fear and weakness
deleted by creator
that’s a weird lookin cat
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Starbird and her team helped document that flood, and in return congressional Republicans and conservative attorneys attacked her research, alleging it amounted to censorship and violated the first amendment.
Jim Jordan, chair of the House judiciary committee, served as the ringleader of this effort in Congress, using his power to investigate groups and researchers that work to counter misinformation, particularly as it related to elections and Covid-19.
A federal lawsuit from the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana alleges that the Biden administration violated the first amendment by colluding with social media companies to censor and suppress speech.
The pressure campaign has chilled misinformation research just ahead of the pivotal 2024 presidential election, as some academics switch what they focus on and others figure out ways to better explain their work to a mixed audience.
Her work was included in Jordan’s investigation, her emails were sought by the Louisiana and Missouri attorneys general, she was sued in another lawsuit brought by Stephen Miller’s America First Legal, and she and the center have been inundated by records requests.
Widespread misinformation shared by rightwing politicians and activists since the 2020 election culminated in the January 6 insurrection, which was motivated by false claims of electoral fraud, almost all of which have been thrown out of court.
The original article contains 1,197 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 82%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
The loss of trust in the election system is not the fault of anyone but the public health apparatus that was used to change all the election rules last minute for no good reason. Just like how all the fascism we were subjected to in the name of covid rightfully lost people’s faith in most public institutions
deleted by creator
I think you need one more mask. People can still smell your breath
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Most reasonable people understood it was a reasonable response to a shitty circumstance.
Ask Jewish people if they felt wearing masks and social distancing reminded them of the holocaust.
No, it was not reasonable. It was not backed by science, so what was the real reason?
It doesn’t matter what race you are, all normal people oppose medical fascism
it was absolutely backed by science, regardless of what people like Joe Rogan say…
It was not backed by actual science in any way
[Citation Needed]
And in case you want one which does support the wearing of masks, here is a lengthy report with plenty of it’s own cited sources on all of the scientific reasons that masks were used to prevent the spread of COVID (note it’s a pdf not web page).
There’s also evidence now that the use of masks was effective, so in addition to there having been good reasons to start using masks before, there’s now also scientific evidence that it worked. Here’s one study on the topic which states: “There was a significant decline in daily COVID-19 growth rate after the mandating of face covers in public, with the effect increasing over time after the orders were signed.”
If you’re going to claim that something is unscientific, please back it up with something more than blind confidence.
No valid studies have shown mask mandates to be effective, but that’s not even the topic. There are zero studies showing any reasoning behind the changes done to election rules. None are backed by science, so what was the reason?
You have literally been given a number of studies that show that masks are effective. Either shut the fuck up, or provide your own you giant moron… Oh, and no, saying “no valid studies” is not proof of anything. Nor is the YouTube video I just bet you’re itching to reply with. Peer reviewed studies, like the ones already provided. We’ll wait.
What’s your definition of fascism?
Things you don’t agree with?
Not being able to go out in public. Censorship. Forced injection of drugs. Targeted forced shutdowns of businesses.
Did you get held down and given an injection?
Did you hear about that lady who chose to have sex with he boss to keep her job? She has the audacity to cry rape and act like he forced her! We all know that NOBODY forced her to sleep with them and it was her choice
I don’t understand, is that a yes or a no?
It’s 100% rape due to the power dynamic and she was literally doing it to keep her job. Sure, she may not have fought him off, but it’s still rape.
Agree, let’s stop all the medical fascism, women should have a right to choose what happens to their bodies, including abortion.
And let’s agree these suggested laws preventing some folks (read: trans) from getting care are like actual death panels.
Yeah let’s do all that as well as ban lockdowns and vaccine mandates
I was obviously baiting here, and expecting a different response, so I can’t argue against your consistency…
Yes the fucking fascist pricks won’t even let me chain-smoke while I pump my gas! And since when is it ILLEGAL to drink MY booze in MY car while I’m driving home from my court appointed ANGER MANAGEMENT classes? Insane! You sheeple are the worst.
Off topic
