this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
255 points (98.9% liked)

Fediverse vs Disinformation

2244 readers
328 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com
FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
FundMECFS@lemmy.dbzer0.com
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
unruffled@anarchist.nexus
255
Workers who fall for ‘corporate bullshit’ may be worse at their jobs, study finds (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to c/fediverse_vs_disinfo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
41 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“The people that are the most susceptible to the corporate bullshit tended to choose the worst solutions to those problems on a consistent basis,” Littrell said.

Hmmmmmmmm.

Well that goes some way partially to explaining why management at large corporations almost as a rule are uselessly incompetent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Which ass-tier PhDs are you referencing that only require learning?

The sort of PhD that lands you a job in "HR, accounting, marketing and finance", of course!

...okay, I'm being cheeky with the above. But serious now: 90% of research is learning. And the other 10% don't really require you to be specially intelligent, they require you to be specially stubborn and methodological.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 4 months ago

I mean that's mostly true. Coming up with novel ideas and how to test them is a small (but critical) part of the job. Still I agree, you don't actually spend that much time on it.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

PhD is really mostly a proxy for how rich or educated your parents were. And rich people always score higher on general intelligence because they are better educated due to money. Less than a 1/3 of PhD students are first-generation. Meaning 2/3 of them have parents who have advanced degrees.

I was a first gen PhD student. I was the only one in my cohort of 20 students who was. Everyone else had highly educated parents. I ended up quitting because the deck was so incredibly stacked against me, and my dream job/career was basically the lazy fall-back career of folks who had generations of education and money carrying them through life.