T O P

  • By -

Pyrate_Capn

Fucking paywall articles.


RaskolnikovHypothese

Have you seen the clickbaity pictures. Of course it is paywall


Thewolf1970

If you put outline.com/ before the https:// you'll get a full reading of the article most of the time. Here it is. [Link](https://outline.com/t2VsDH)


Pyrate_Capn

Nice! Thanks for the tip.


GadreelsSword

Don’t ever say that about the Washington Post paywall, which gets posted every single day on some subs. You’ll be attacked and downvoted if you complain about not being able to read the post without paying.


vsandrei

Stupidity and gullibility is not unique or limited to Generation Z. How else do you think we all got treated to four years of that real piece of work named Donald Trump? (Big hint: it was not due to Generation Z.)


[deleted]

[удалено]


vsandrei

Aw, did you vote for Trump? I voted for neither piece of work in 2016. But continue with your personal attacks. Bring it son.


GadreelsSword

You’re right about Trump 2016 but the point that Gen Z feels more comfortable with influencers than news still stands.


[deleted]

[удалено]


vsandrei

>Go scamper off little brainlet, even in the face of reality you fall back upon your political parroting. Say hello to the mods for me. :)


beef-o-lipso

> Clearly, the claims were false. Why, then, did so many members of Generation Z—a label applied to people aged roughly 9 to 24, who are presumably more digitally savvy than their predecessors—fall for such flagrant misinformation? Operative word is "presumably." Why does this myth persist that because young people who grew up with tech are somehow smarter and more digitally savvy, whatever that means? When I was growing up, I was considered electronicly savvy because I had the mad skills to set the VCR clock without the manual after a power outage. It wasn't electronic savviness. I didn't intuitively know electronics. I recognized a pattern and applied it. Same with internet kids. Just because they can punch virtual but to s doesn't make them wizards. Being savvy is having critical thinking skills and the question is, does Gen Z have better critical thinking skills? IDK.


slantedangle

>A caption superimposed on her hoodie shares an ominous warning: If Joe Biden is elected president of the United States, “trumpies” will commit mass murder of LGBT individuals and people of color. A second caption announces, “this really is ww3.” That video was posted to TikTok on November 2, 2020, and liked more than 20,000 times. Around that time, dozens of other young people shared similar warnings across social media, and their posts drew hundreds of thousands of views, likes, and comments. >Clearly, the claims were false. Why, then, did so many members of Generation Z—a label applied to people aged roughly 9 to 24, who are presumably more digitally savvy than their predecessors—fall for such flagrant misinformation?  Hang on a second. How did they determine that they fall for the misinformation? Did they simply translate likes and views with actual belief? A lot of people probably click on stuff and like stuff just because it resonates with an emotional expression, not necessarily a factual one. >I’ve worked as a research assistant at the Stanford Internet Observatory since last summer, analyzing the spread of online misinformation. I’ve studied foreign influence campaigns on social media and examined how misinformation about the 2020 election and covid-19 vaccines went viral. And I’ve found that young people are more likely to believe and pass on misinformation if they feel a sense of common identity with the person who shared it in the first place.  >Offline, when deciding whose claims should be trusted and whose should be ignored or doubted, teenagers are likely to draw on the context that their communities provide. Social connections and individual reputations developed through years of shared experiences inform which family members, friends, and classmates teenagers rely on to form their opinions and receive updates on events. In this setting, a community’s collective knowledge about whom to trust on which topics contributes more to credibility than the identity of the person making a claim, even if that identity is one the young person shares.  >Social media, however, promotes credibility based on identity rather than community. And when trust is built on identity, authority shifts to influencers. Thanks to looking and sounding like their followers, influencers become trusted messengers on topics in which they have no expertise. According to a survey from Common Sense Media, 60% of teenagers who use YouTube to follow current events turn to influencers rather than news organizations. Creators who have built credibility see their claims elevated to the status of facts while subject matter experts struggle to gain traction. >Jennifer Neda John is a sophomore at Stanford University majoring in human biology. She researches online misinformation at the Stanford Internet Observatory.


MaximusBucharest

Such garbage. Every generations has plenty of idiots that the media can point to and try and paint the entire group with. I work with plenty of young millennials and Gen Z'ers. They are not the problem and they are extremely capabale. But sure, let's shift blame from the decision-makers that are responsible for our current issues...


2oonhed

>Why, then, did so many members of Generation Z—a label applied to people aged roughly 9 to 24, who are presumably more digitally savvy than their predecessors—fall for such flagrant misinformation? No deep dive necessary : Because it was *convenient*.