853, are you referring to me re my frankly misleading comments re Wheel Fi Horns, which I was happy to withdraw when the error of my ways was pointed out to me?
If so, I was guilty as charged on that one, but not relevant here I think.
It was to add context to your comment here:
spiritofmusic said:
WBF started as predominantly as a place for enthusiasts and punters to talk about gear, concepts, sounds.
If engineers did chime in, it was never to hawk their wares, but to genuinely add to the discourse (Ralph of Atmasphere being a good example).
Only in the last couple of years has WBF morphed into a hybrid with manufacturers/designers AND NOW dealers getting involved.
Now there’s a lot more “fake news” potentially about.
The inference being that somehow because dealers are now involved (with stated vested interests) there’s “a lot more “fake news” potentially about”.
Is there though?
Are dealer/distributor/manufacturers more likely to peddle in disinformation than an anonymous punter/blogger? Is disinformation the sole reserve of those with vested interests? Are enthusiasts and punters more likely to avoid disinformation because they’re “free” of potential conflicts of interest and the consequences of peddling in disinformation? Are engineers therefore incapable of propagating disinformation simply because of the assumption they’re here to “genuinely add to the discourse”?
I’d say each needs to be answered on a case-by-case basis.
I may not share nor endorse all of Joshua’s posts, and I’m certainly not defending him (no do I believe I need do so), but skin-in-the-game is always relevant apropos accusations of misinformation.
My point is and remains that we would perhaps do well to discuss any reports of “fake news” in the context of harm (1) rather than vested interests (2). In the specific case mentioned above, the small, boutique manufacturer was far more vulnerable to potential downside from misleading comments made on an online forum than the poster who made them.
Hope that clarifies things.
Best!
853guy
(1) One thousand false reports of a Yeti sighting in downtown NYC during rush hour will not cause anywhere the level of harm as a single false report of an outbreak of the Marburg virus in downtown NYC during rush hour. Consider that in the latter case, thousands of police, medical professionals, biosafety specialists and government agents will be rallied to a prevent an outbreak, and thousands if not tens of thousands of citizens will attempt to flee the city, potentially causing harm to themselves and/or others in the process. Potential for harm defines dis/misinformation more than the source of the dis/misinformation itself. It's why it's a criminal act to knowingly report a false bomb threat, but not to say you saw Bigfoot.
(2) We should not conflate vested interests with conflict of interest. It’s possible to have vested interests and yet operate ethically, even if optics suggest otherwise.