Imagine somebody tweets that they think men on dating apps are jerks.
A commenter asks, "Do you have any peer-reviewed publications to back up your claim?"
The tweeter says they don't.
The commenter then accuses them of knowingly spreading misinformation.
A commenter asks, "Do you have any peer-reviewed publications to back up your claim?"
The tweeter says they don't.
The commenter then accuses them of knowingly spreading misinformation.
I call this kind of thing a "claim escalation" and I think it's usually a jerk move. The original person tweets something that we all know to take with a pinch of salt. But responders pretend the the tweeter's claim is more than it is as a way of silencing their perspective.
Here's another example. Imagine somebody says that when they have a tummy ache, they find that warm soup stock often helps. If this person has no medical basis for this claim, would we be justified in calling them out for spreading potentially dangerous medical misinformation?
My intuition is that in the case of the soup stock, it's just a bit of harmless talk. My intuitions flip the other way if the person was recommending soup stock as a cure for covid-19. In that case, I would definitely like for that person to have references for whatever they say.
Where do you think the line should be between being a jerk and providing a valuable public service by pushing back against misinformation?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
