Jeder Dritte glaubt, dass er Nachrichten nicht bei traditionellen Medien wie Zeitungen und Fernsehen suchen muss. Stattdessen glauben sie, dass „die Nachrichten mich finden“ (NFM) und verlassen sich bei der Informationsbeschaffung auf Algorithmen und soziale Netzwerke. Dadurch sind sie möglicherweise anfälliger dafür, Fehlinformationen zu glauben und weiterzugeben.
https://www.psu.edu/news/bellisario-college-communications/story/news-will-find-me-mindset-makes-people-trust-algorithms-and
38 Kommentare
‘News will find me’ mindset makes people trust algorithms and online networks

Researchers found that people who think “news will find me” tend to view their online networks as just as credible as professional journalists and editors.
[**One in three**](https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/11974) people believe they don’t have to seek the news from traditional outlets like newspapers and television. Instead, they think the “news will find me” (NFM), relying on algorithms and social networks to get their information. A research team led by Penn State scholars recently found that these individuals often consider their online networks to be as trustworthy as professional editors and journalists.
This mindset may make people more vulnerable to believing and sharing misinformation, according to the researchers, who published their findings in the journal [**Social Media & Society**](https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051261434801).
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20563051261434801
It *may*??? Lot of open doors lately.
There’s just something about a third of the population.
[deleted]
How is this any different? If you go to WSJ because you expect to find news there, you’re still relying on their decision of what news to present. Same thing if you go to FB or Reddit. Sometimes an algorithm’s decision of what news to show is less biased or differently biased and includes topics that other news sources are suppressing.
Algorithms will be the downfall of society
I think there’s an earnest belief among many (particularly the young) that an algorithm scraping social media for new information could provide a better objective picture of what is happening in the world than relying on individual news outlets.
Social media has done a ton to amplify voices that wouldn’t have otherwise been heard, but it has also reinforced the growing belief that reliable news simply appears out of thin air.
You might believe information should be free. That’s a valid opinion; but expecting news to be free is the same as asking to be lied to.
Print and TV are dead; that’s just the way it is. But we’re going to regret throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Traditional outlets are more or less worthless right now, but they’re still better than letting the algorithm shove it down your throat. Might as well just get your news from the guy sitting next to you at the bar.
We’re in a real bad place for news. There really isn’t anything reputable except for a handful of non-profits.
As opposed to being forced news via the tried and true propaganda networks?
Just a reminder, Ground News is a thing.
Doesn’t feel like the „traditional“ outlets are any less corrupted :\
Is algorithm slop actually worse than being directly spoon fed corporate media with systemic biases aligned with class interests that are fundamentally incompatible with our class interests though? Corporate media is still an „algorithm“ it’s just that the algorithm is that what gets covered and how it gets covered is based on the interests of the owners, advertisers, etc.
And 1 in 3 decide who is president.
Terrifying. The lack of understanding of the value of journalism has really infiltrated American society beyond reasonable limits.
There is a simple test for misinformation. If you never hear anything contrary to your opinion, you’re in an echo chamber, pure and simple.
I also am one of these people. I get my news on vibes alone. An I misinformed, I don’t think so. I harken back to a quote from Denzel Washington. ~”if you don’t watch the news you’re uniformed, if you do watch the news you are misinformed.”
Not sure how to feel about this showing up algorithmically on my feed
>relying on algorithms and social networks
So whoever finetunes the algorithms shapes your worldview. Surely it’s only benevolent omniscient beings at the helm, they would never use algorithms for any nefarious purposes. Like, they would never use their social media platforms to sway the public opinion. Oh no.
Seems misleading. I don’t know anyone that actively seeks out information. As in, goes online, and engages in active research to learn about some topic or issue. That doesn’t necessarily mean they would agree with the statement that they „don’t have to seek news from traditional sources“. They may be aware that they’re uninformed about most topics.
There’s a difference between those people and people who have been duped by an algorithm.
Ironically, almost the entirety of reddit would fall into the category of people who won’t seek information and have been duped by an algorithm.
I am someone who always followed brews and world events, however i can no longer afford y t o actively follow most credible online outlets. The organisations i followed in the early 2000s are now either gone or financially out of my reach
I think we all know who this group of people is.
I think this has increased a lot since many news sites began hiding all their articles behind paywalls. I know that the ones I used to use almost all use paywalls now.
Ok, but there’s a lot of independent journalists regularly publishing and posting on social media. Many people would rather follow them than rely on the billionaire owned news conglomerates. So throwing out everyone that “uses social media to get news” seems like an oversimplification of a complex problem.
Major new outlets? Like fox? Or ones owned by owners of fox? Like which news outlets?
I’m part of that one in three, but it’s not because I believe the news will find me– it’s because I don’t have the mental or emotional bandwidth to keep up. My awareness (or lack thereof) of what is happening in Ukraine or Iran (to pick two recent examples) doesn’t change how I’m spending my time, how I spend my money, or how I vote.
But I’m not making the mistake of thinking I am somehow more informed because of my stance on exposure to national or international news. I know I am less informed; but, by the same token, I believe I am also less _misinformed_, and perhaps the net is coming out in my favor.
Billionares openly bought traditional news outlets and are using them to spread misinformation. Social media might not be great, but it’s pretty naive to pretend that traditional news outlets are better just because they have an editor (who is going to lose their job if they don’t spread the misinformation they’re told to spread).
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/washington-post-editorial-shift-bezos-pro-billionaire-propaganda/
Oh, we doomed folks. DOOMED.
When the news I’m waiting for happens, it *will* find me.
More people should actively sub to things like AP, Reuters, NPR, UPI, Al Jazeera, etc.
> “For some people, the algorithm now carries the same weight as a journalist,” said co-author Homero Gil De Zúñiga, distinguished professor of media studies at Penn State. “We’re seeing a flattening of authority so that algorithms and social media feeds are being trusted like professional journalism.”
We’re seeing the same thing with how LLMs are being conflated with the traditional understanding of AI, despite them being two very different things. I think it comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding in the general populace of how these technologies work: social media rewards engagement, not veracity and LLMs are nothing more than predictive text.
Those traditional news outlets can also share misinformation. Corporations are bowing down to DJT and altering their news to fit his tantrums.
Traditional outlets = media owned by corporations
Traditional outlets need to be trustworthy and reliable, first.
Isn’t waiting for a paper to show up still.waiting for the news to literally find me?
See now, there’s your problem.
When news outlets are 90% ads and scams, or completely pay to access – it removes my choices for gathering local and general news, specially when I don’t pay for TV or have satellite access (I’m not getting a whole box and antenna just for news on my monitor)
„Extra, Extra, read all about it!“
We have a long history of the news finding us.
The best journalists today are independent ones Change my mind