now it’s 1984. Or 2002. Or –?
I admit my impulse on the facebook policy…
A creepy message alerting you that you may have been exposed to harmful material and suggesting a support group for ex klan members —
— Hm…
Understood, we are stuck in a world where I just now see the article “Why people believe in ufos and lab leaks” — I suppose sliding away recent circumstantial evidence that grants credence to what is a not racist on its face but claimed to be so for reasons no one has ever exlained to me —
Even if the premise were completely bogus —
theory of viral origins —
Or have we gotten enough since then so that the original headline for this Washington Post story is back on?
— is now apt to garner its own Facebook “disinformation” warning.
I admit my first impulse on the new Facebook policy…
is to want to test the waters…
Or see someone do so…
Figure out some boundary lines. Concoct a bizarre Byzantine conspiracy theory. Make up a name for a “them” that does not comport to anyone real.
The one problem is I think that’s how qanon started.
Imagine the year is 2002, or at a a similar public opinion makeup.  The government comes out swinging against weird conspiracy theories. You are marching in anti-war marches as a good liberal – leftists, kitty corner with 9/11 Truth believers, and it is that which at some point whatever thoughts you entertain in parsing through alternative media to “get through the military propaganda lies” disects with theirs. And WordPress and friendster and Google adopts a warning label policy… How does the partisan makeup of the nation respond?
… Apt to create the sensation the “Parental Advisory Explicit Lyrics” did for the market in music — create more attractive commodities… Lure kids to “the good stuff”…Â For some, it is not a good Facebook page until it gets the warning, so what do they have to add to get that warning?