"#Mastodon: A Social Media Platform Dominated By #Pedophiles & #Child #Porn"
The #disinformation at #Secjuice is quite well done: The article gives itself an #investigative veneer, there are many links, alleged evidence and screenshots. Everything seems somehow conclusive - if you read too fast....
Obviously, the author leaves out, that the majority of the community moderates other inhuman attitudes such as #racism, #sexism, #homophobia and #transphobia and blocks instances which don't actively take action against this content.
That's also why radical right-wing Mastodon projects like Gab.ai don't stand a chance in the community and wither away in isolation....
Just another article filled with #bullshit...
@avedik Would like to see some debunking of this because I've already seen it used as for example a wikipedia source to claim that the #mastodon user surge in april 2017 was caused by #pedophiles
A good way to counter mis-information would be to ask for people to back up claims with EVIDENCE. Another way is to provide EVIDENCE to back up statements.
As far as I am aware Wikipedia is NOT considered an academic source of information. No harm in quoting it depends on where you are using that information.
@zleap @73ms
Asking for #evidence in a private discussion makes always sense.
I think it is more complicated however, if a 'author' is writing on a news-platform that "#Mastodon is a Social Media Platform Dominated By #Pedophiles & #Childporn"
And if he is smart enough to give the article a conclusive touch with alleged evidence...
Is it worth to react? If so, how?
You could always try a indirect approach ask for more information and links to sources to help verify the information.
Eitehr that we ignore the bad journalists and promote / praise those who are doing the right thing, but I guess we need to balance that wit helping the less experienced do a better job.
Everyone has to start somewhere, it is the attitude to improving what and how you do things that should also count.
