[lariati]

I think this partially a myopic view from young people.

I remember being a little kid and watching a week long show about the JFK conspiracy on either one of the big 3 networks or PBS. Area 51 alien conspiracy is so ubiquitous I don't even know how you would track it 30 years ago.

Alex Jones that is banned from youtube for all these crazy conspiracy theories he puts out use to be on practically nationally on AM radio stations for hours a day. The Art Bell show was broadcast nightly for decades and was maybe even more insane than Alex Jones.

It is telling that the people who are weaponizing this concept of "misinformation" do not point it at all at Bigfoot researchers. What is more "misinformation" than the idea of giant apes running around the US forest? Of course, that doesn't count because there is no political gain to be had.

The whole process is so transparent.

We basically have epistemological certainty as long as their is political gain to be had from the certainty. JFK assassination is probably the best example. The theta/time decay has all evaporated on the political gain from the conspiracy so that no longer matters.

[unfocussed_mike]

> It is telling that the people who are weaponizing this concept of "misinformation" do not point it at all at Bigfoot researchers. What is more "misinformation" than the idea of giant apes running around the US forest? Of course, that doesn't count because there is no political gain to be had.

There's no political gain to be had on either side of the Bigfoot-in-the-forest argument, in fact. Or financial gain, or notoriety, or kudos. Which is why it's really not particularly telling.

It's just a fringe belief.

Misinformation matters when its intent is to undermine democracy or governance in the public good, undermine civic or civil society, create an "other" that can be attacked, create a pretext for war or social unrest or vigilantism etc.

I don't think people who believe in Bigfoot really fit the pattern. Nor do Flat-Earthers. Though this kind of belief is an indicator of the kind of credulity that led to the huge traction gained by the Comet Ping Pong Pizzagate story and the current omniconspiracy of antivax/QAnon/stolen election/5G/Great Reset/Schwab/Soros/Gates Foundation etc.

[cryptoboy2283]

Jones was not a problem for all these platforms for many years, until recent events.

[unfocussed_mike]

I think he's always been a problem (his Sandy Hook crisis actor lies got him into at least a little difficulty with the platforms) but his problematic nature has always fit within free speech, because he generally knows how to dial it back just inside those boundaries.

Likewise with David Icke or the more self-limiting lunacy of Kate Shemirani; these people it's better not to worry about.

Rudy Giuliani or MTG? Maybe worth worrying about because they can tip things over into riots.