this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
322 points (98.8% liked)

Fediverse vs Disinformation

1412 readers
12 users here now

Pointing out, debunking, and spreading awareness about state- and company-sponsored astroturfing on Lemmy and elsewhere. This includes social media manipulation, propaganda, and disinformation campaigns, among others.

Propaganda and disinformation are a big problem on the internet, and the Fediverse is no exception.

What's the difference between misinformation and disinformation? The inadvertent spread of false information is misinformation. Disinformation is the intentional spread of falsehoods.

By equipping yourself with knowledge of current disinformation campaigns by state actors, corporations and their cheerleaders, you will be better able to identify, report and (hopefully) remove content matching known disinformation campaigns.


Community rules

Same as instance rules, plus:

  1. No disinformation
  2. Posts must be relevant to the topic of astroturfing, propaganda and/or disinformation

Related websites


Matrix chat links

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 

The right dominates the online media ecosystem, seeping into sports, comedy, and other supposedly nonpolitical spaces

A new Media Matters analysis found 9 out of the 10 top online shows assessed are right-leaning

As Americans increasingly get their news from online shows and streamers, the influence of this media ecosystem becomes more prominent — and Media Matters has found that the most popular of this content is overwhelmingly right-leaning.

In a new study, Media Matters assessed the audience size of popular online shows — podcasts, streams, and other long-form audio and video content regularly posted online. To do so, we gathered data on the number of followers, subscribers, and views across streaming platforms (YouTube, Spotify, Rumble, Twitch, and Kick) and social media platforms that are used to amplify and promote these shows (Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok). Apple Podcasts does not publicly provide follower counts on its platform, so it was not included in the audience data.

This analysis was based on 320 online shows with a right-leaning or left-leaning ideological bent. We found that right-leaning online shows dominate the ecosystem, with substantially larger audiences on both politics/news shows and supposedly nonpolitical shows that we determined often platformed ideological content or guests.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 79 points 3 months ago (3 children)

people who prefer to form their own opinions instead of having it spoonfed to them tend to not idolize the flapping faceholes on tv the way republican incels do

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 28 points 3 months ago (1 children)

we also tend to cite our sources rather than say "do your own research"

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 14 points 3 months ago

What they mean: "Look up an article supporting your position on the web."

What it should mean: "Test your hypothesis and get your findings peer reviewed and replicated."

[–] Zess@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Glad other people see it so obviously. They claim to be independent thinkers immune to brainwashing but all they do is listen to and repeat any drivel they already agree with. And if you bring their "alpha male" rhetoric into it it's even funnier because they're nothing but sheep who drool over any man who seems powerful. They are the opposite of everything they claim to be.

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

we need laws globally to force all news organization to print corrections of equal scale for iterms that are proved to be incorrect

[–] jaxxed@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

We all want accountability and authenticity, but if you are going to suggest something like that, you at least have to consider the mechanism needed, and how difficult it would be to get it right.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 3 months ago (3 children)

They used subscriber count as a metric which is really stupid.

Peterson for example shows up with 23M for his total social media presence. His YT channel has 8.64M subscribers but he has become completely irrelevant and his videos average around 200k views with some exceptions.

View count is all that matters here if we are talking about political influence.

[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 6 points 3 months ago

Also Rogan more than likely has a fucking ton of idle left wing subs. Dudes show was fucking great before he moved to Texas.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Trevor Noah has his own show?

This chart includes Youtube, Spotify, Twitch, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

He sure does! And he's left-leaning because he was born half-White half-Black during Apartheid. His autobiography is literally titled "Born a Crime", and it talks about how utterly fucked and dystopian apartheid South Africa was. How he spent his life not only becoming a master of code-switching and comedy to survive, but fight back.

He's a badass. The man has my respect for life.

[–] Jhuskindle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Not only that but we know for a fact subscriber count can be bought. X uses hundreds of thousands of bot accounts to fuel whatever they are in the mood for. It doesn't really mean much.

[–] casmael@lemm.ee 24 points 3 months ago

I fucking hate Joe rogan, man

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)
  1. Leftists face much more pushback to be deplatformed than rightwingers.
  2. Leftists and corporate sponsors don’t mix, since leftists threaten capital, so paying for the program’s cost is an issue.
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 months ago

since leftists threaten capital, so paying for the program’s cost is an issue.

Just a friendly reminder to support your favorite leftist content producers with donations if you can afford to. There are a couple outlets that I really appreciate, and I have a small recurring monthly donation to them. I know it's not much, but every little bit helps.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] match@pawb.social 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

this is an interesting problem: let's say that there's 50 right leaning viewers and 50 left leaning viewers. let's also say that the 50 left leaning viewers are spoiled for choice and get 50 different YouTubers they're into, while the to right leaning viewers don't get as many quality options and settle on 5 YouTubers. each of the 5 YouTubers that appeals to the right now dominate the rankings specifically because the field is weak

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 months ago

It's not really a problem. Authoritarians need a few daddy figures while leftists prefer a variety of opinions.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 months ago

I don't think that's what's happening though? Your example implies that there are 10x more content creators on the left than on the right and that's just not true.

[–] sunglocto@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Asmongold

Never seen a person say that they're a centrist like 50 times, then go on to exclusively feature republicans, right wing channels, elon twitter simps, gamergate and just other clearly biased personalities. Wish he'd be more honest and say that he's clearly aligned with the right

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago

LOL that always seems to be the way centrist roll.

They're conservatives but don't like the stink of conservative politics.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 months ago

You might also call it "cultural hegemony".

[–] Lyrl@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The "society and culture" and "comedy" topics are only slightly right-skewed, which seems representative of the US voting behavior with Republicans winning more elections but not by much.

The non-political topics with political sprinkles are interesting, and where the right overwhelms the left. People don't listen to these shows because of the politics - they are there for the sports talk, or the discussion on getting and staying healthy, or for some inspiration and spiritual reflection - but the political sprinkles aren't enough to drive them away. Does anyone see a path to a left-leaning host attracting significant audiences for mainly sports or wellness or spirituality, with occasional progressive sprinkles?

[–] peregrin5@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Maybe the left is just less terminally online than the right.

[–] johncandy1812@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Also not as heavily funded by the right-wing sponsors. Tim Pool is funded by Russia.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 4 points 3 months ago

the city is back up, it's a must, we outside

[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Oof that h3 blue marker i hope it stays but I feel like he will begin his grift to the right soon

[–] Silk@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Since they are full on Zionists and they basically use their community as a brigading attack dog I had a laugh when I saw them blue.

[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah same i am a hasan fan over h3 and the fall out has sad

[–] recursiveInsurgent@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago

I don’t listen to populist podcasts, I just read Wikipedia instead.

[–] draughtcyclist@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Is Lex Friedman right leaning? I haven't listened a ton, but I got a neutral impression.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] draughtcyclist@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Ah, that makes sense. It's more recent.