Elon Musk has a very bad idea for a website rating journalists

Elon Musk has, as I imagine he often does during meetings or long automobile rides, come up with an idea for a new thing. Unlike the Hyperloop, which was cool, and various space-related notions, which we know he’s at least partly expert about, this one is just plain bad. It’s basically Yelp But For Journalism.

He may as well have said, I detected this large can marked “worms” and I’m going to open it, or, I’ve determined a new method for herding cats.

The idea of holding publishings and people accountable is great. Unfortunately it is the kind of problem that does not yield to even the best of intentions and smart engineering, because it is quickly complicated by the ethical, procedural and practical questions of crowdsourcing “the truth.”

He agreed with another Twitter user, whose remark is indistinguishable from sarcasm 😛 TAGEND

My guess is Musk does not often use Yelp, and has never operated a small business like a restaurant or salon.

Especially in today’s fiercely divided internet landscape, there is no dependable metric for truth or accountability. Some will say The New York Times is the most trusted newspaper in America — others will call it a corrupted cloth with a liberal agenda. Individual stories will receive the same treatment, with some disputing what they believe are biases and others asserting those same things as totally factual.

And while the truth lies somewhere in between these extremes, it is unlikely to be the mathematical mean of them. The” wisdom of the crowd ,” so often elicited but so seldom demonstrated, cannot depend on an equal number of people being totally wrong in opposite styles, producing a kind of stable system of bias.

The forces-out at work here — psychological, political, sociological, institutional — are subtle and incalculable.

The origins of this faith, and of the notion that there is somehow a quorum of truth-seekers in this age of misrepresentation, are unclear.

Facebook’s attempts to crowdsource the legitimacy of news narratives has had mixed results, and the predictable outcome is, of course, that people simply report as false news with which they disagree. Independent adjudicators are required, and Facebook has fired and hired them by the hundreds, but is yet to arrive at some system that produces outcomes worth talking about.

Fact-checking sites perform an invaluable service, but the objective is labor-intensive , not a self-regulating system like what Musk proposes. Such systems are unavoidably and notoriously was governed by chaos, election brigades, bots, infiltrators, agents provocateur and so on.

Easier told than done — in fact, often said and never done, for years and years and years, by some of the smartest people in the industry. It’s not to say it is impossible, but Musk’s glib positivity and ignorance or dismissal of a decade and more of efforts on this front are not inspiring.( Nate Silver, for one, is furious .)

Likely as a demonstration of his” faith in the people ,” if there are any on bot-ridden Twitter, he has put the idea up for public evaluation.

Currently the vote is about 90 percent yes. It’s hard to explain how dumb this is. Yet like most endeavours it will be instructive, both to others attempting to tame the zeitgeist, and hopefully to Musk.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s