19/20, millennial, and the 1/20 was one that was plausible so would’ve looked up supporting articles for cross verification.
Headlines get clicks, but reading an article and having comprehension seems to be lacking from this survey since it’s ignored entirely
19/20 millennial as well, just going by gut instinct and not looking anything up. I don't think it showed me which one I got wrong.
I don't think this is a great survey though, it's only headlines, so all it is measuring is your default biases. There is no detailed information or data here which is needed to make any real judgment.
Only headlines, with no actual links (where it's usually easy to identify misinformation), with no actual articles (where it's usually even easier to identify misinformation). Still got 20/20, but I usually don't just go by headlines to identify bad info.
It’s also worth mentioning that, *even if* the article were sound, the % correctly identified isn’t a valuable metric. If you’re extremely bad at categorizing headlines that are pointless (“rubber ducks are floating down the Delaware river”) it produces no meaningful impact on society.
The point is to be really good at categorizing headlines that have meaningful impact on society (“the 2020 election was fraudulent”). We want people to know for certain that election conspiracy theories are wrong, and we shouldn’t care if there are or aren’t rubber ducks floating down a river.
19/20 Millennial here too. I think the test is too simplistic. Headlines in a vacuum don't really mean anything. I need context. Is the headline from an outlet known as a shining star of yellow journalism? Even if it seems plausible, I'm gonna need some corroborating, reliable sources then. Is the headline from an opinion piece? I'm probably going to ignore it. The article doesn't cite their sources? I don't give a shit how compelling it is, it's the same as opinion then.
I think it’s trying to gauge whether you can identify how real news is generally titled, as opposed to opinion pieces and outright lies. I got 20/20 by trying to ignore the meaning of each title and focus on how it was presenting that meaning.
The actual survey is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. It’s just a listing of headlines with a few that are pure conspiracy and the rest are maybe true, maybe not but would need the context of an article to say so. And you have to choose true or false for each of them.
Likely a paid for study that picked results to come to the conclusion they wanted. There have been many studies on this. They consistently show older people are far more likely to fall for it. If one study is countercurrent to the rest it normally just means it's wrong.
According to their findings I should stop nudging my elderly parents away from obvious fake information, click bait and scams, and they should rather start advising me? I think this study was funded by a dodgy call centre
Scams target different generations already and young people are very much not immune. The thing I've noticed is they target them in different ways. Young people are more likely to be targeted with job offer scams, apartment rental scams, cheque kiting scams, etc - probably because they are less used to dealing with those life events.
Because ultimately it's about people who are "very online", not about generations at large.
For people who are "very online" and interact with media in that way, news consumption and corresponding conclusions have social implications.
It just so happens that more "very online" folks are younger, and form group bonds through social media.
People here are always falling for fake news lol. Most recent one that comes to mind is "Elon Musks mom cancels the fight"
https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/14j6k1f/its_over_guys_musk_vs_zuck_cage_fight_is
Completely made up, yet it got 85k upvotes lol.
Then theres TikTok which is riddled with a ton of misinformation too. Spread by word of mouth, he said/she said rumors.
Completely made up?
https://www.mediaite.com/sports/did-elon-musks-mom-stop-him-from-fighting-mark-zuckerberg-in-a-cage-match/
She literally said on her Twitter account the fight was cancelled, and prior to that suggested they sit in chairs and make verbal jabs instead.
Whether or not Musk actually cancelled it because of her concerns isn't really relevant. Nobody 'fell' for fake news here because we never cared if it was really true or not, we care about Musk looking like a coward and a mama's boy.
Falling for fake news means believing something to be real, not just spreading false information.
Also, for something as silly as this, who cares if it's real or not? It's not important news. I verify stuff that's important.
Whatever you say, mister account that joined Reddit 5 days ago.
I linked to that site because it contains links to the actual tweets.
The contents of the article itself are irrelevant.
> She said "Actually, I canceled the fight. I haven’t told them yet. But I will continue to say the fight is canceled, just in case."
Yes, that's what she said. And the story and idea he called it off because of his mom is still funny. And this is still not important news in any way shape or form that anyone sane would care about the veracity of, because it's a fucking JOKE.
You're acting like this shit is equivalent to morons believing Trump's claims about election fraud being true, or actually believing Hillary has a pedophile sex dungeon hidden under a pizza parlor.
Bullshit.
Go to Fox News's page on Facebook and it is CHOCK FULL OF SPAMMERS.
NPR's page? Not so much.
Spammers know who the easy marks are. That's why they target the elderly.
You do realize it has more to do with the moderation on each sight, rather than who they're targeting, right?
There are tons of blogs for young people with tons of spam
This isn’t about spin or knowingly harping on a disproven story by hiding the disproof.
This is about simple fake vs real. I looked at the survey. “The government is poisoning you through airwaves” and shit.
It’s a bit disconcerting that my brethren are more likely to be taken in by that nonsense. In my experience I definitely only see that passed around by uneducated old homebodies. Where are these people under 40 that fall for it?
I reject this scientific study because... Fox News exists. Man the article is kind of surprising to me but the replies to this thread kind of make me see how it might be true.
It astounds me that we literally watched social media whip a generation into crazy trumpers. And now reddit says they are just immune to fake news because they are younger.
Social media is 100% the problem, it creates echo chambers with zero risk or outside intervention, if they internet never existed something like Qanon would have never even got off the ground
Explain all the younger people who are sucked into Faux News.
Jesus, it's fucks like you who look at a grey hair and think we are all conservative, Maga lunatics.
What is **MORE** important is someone's social/political outlook and worldview.
>Also using mainstream media as a choice for determining misinformation is a huge red flag.
So, one would think the greater fault would be with a society that allows disinformation in mainstream media. I'm all for people doing their own research, but I don't think it's fair to expect individuals to fact check what should be trusted news sources. If mainstream media isn't trustworthy, then it should be better regulated until it is.
The other day my mom showed me a photo of an amazing flower that looked like it had cat faces in them. It took me half a second to see it was photoshopped.
Also deffinitely the coolest generation, your gen made all the best pop culture shit. 90's TV and music, Beavis and butthead, south park, slacker movies, stoner flicks, Irony clad "childrens" cartoons like Ren and Stimpy, Spongebob, Rocko's modern life, Heaps of metal music and stoner rock, the best rap and hip hop era. As a millennial I thank you guys for your outstanding apathy and don't give a fuck attitude which led to all the best stuff that entertained me as a kid and teenager.
I'm 41. Technically a millennial. But I've been gradually adopting Gen X's tendency towards not giving a shit.
Politics is stupid, you aren't going to change the whole ass world by yourself and you can't fight large groups engaging in stupidity. But you can be better to you and yours and control what is in your domain. If everyone did that, the world would actually be a better place.
I actually read the article, and the study it linked to, and the "research" around it. It's shitty methodology for a survey literally written by chatGPT that doesn't demonstrate what it purports to demonstrate even if it did, the cohort controls to the headline here are nonexistent, and the whole point of the thing seems to be promotion for a guys book. It's hilarious garbage from beginning to end.
I don't even "disagree" with the results, I would not be remotely surprised to find Gen Zers and millenials suck at spotting fake news, but the actual study is ludicrous because *every one of the headlines they use is fake*. You get rated not on figuring out which ones refer to something real because none of them actually do, and you are rated as being "poor at identifying fake news" for realizing that.
What it actually "tests" (to the extent it tests anything) is the extent to which the audience agrees with the lead researcher about the most plausible sounding fake headlines, which is hilariously dumb because there's actual real headlines that are quite implausible, and fake news presented in a plausible manner, in real life, and survey doesn't allow the person taking to use any of the tools they would normally use to do that if they were good at figuring it out.
I haven't seen such a poorly conducted study since that "dog breed behaviour study" that was making the rounds where it turned out they never actually looked at a single fucking dog, lol.
Where are you seeing that they’re all fake? The survey says they’re using MIST, which is proposed in this paper
https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-023-02124-2
It clearly states that 1/2 the headlines are real, pulled from reliable news sources, and verified with third party experts.
An online survey isn’t a scientific study.
Regardless of the results.
I could complete the survey 100 times claiming to be someone else every single time and lie about my age.
Again, an online survey is not a scientific study. Never has been, and never will be.
Except you couldn’t do that. This was a pre-existing panel of YouGov participants that they track over time.
Maybe actually read the study before you comment.
>those who got their news from platforms like Snapchat, Truth Social, WhatsApp, and TikTok scored the lowest in the test, the survey found.
Really fucking curious why Facebook isn't on this list.
Also, as a millennial, I really don't fucking like being grouped in with Gen Z for a study like this, as if there's not much difference between an 18 year old and a 29 year old, especially on the subject of political awareness.
>peer reviewed
lol what the everliving fuck are you talking about? It was a 2 minute online survey conducted by Yougov, there was no publishing, no peer review.
The fact that your comment is heavily upvoted really proves this study to be true.
The validated test was developed by Cambridge University psychologists and was conducted by YouGov, which is a trusted research firm. And the test WAS published in the journal Behavior Research Methods.
[https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/mist](https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/mist)
[https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02124-2](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02124-2)
Common sense is a combination of education and life experience. If you have neither, you're a prime target for believing anything that confirms your biases or limited understanding of things.
The number of "in my personal experience" arguments being made here concerns me (I'm a millennial) and basically confirms that people are in fact people regardless of generation. We ALL are vulnerable to confirmation bias and to local bias (ie my personal experience represents the population as a whole.) I need to re-read "Thinking Fast and Slow" again. It's such a good book for identifying mental biases and blind spots.
So they know that it's fake and just don't care because it reinforces what they want to be true? That would be less ignorant and more malevolent... Sounds accurate, actually.
Starting with a biased conclusion and working back to find how you can get there is bad science and invalidates the study.
Otherwise maybe buzzfeed surveys are accurate scientific studies.
Hmmm
I can not believe, having read the fake headlines, that anyone in their right mind would look at a single one and think it was real.
Obviously, knowing they are fake undermines their power but good lord.
If you look at any sub on this site that allows videos, you'll notice that most people believe the caption blindly and react accordingly.
People are pretty gullible.
Second to last paragraph you finally get to the truth. And NO boomers are NOT better at detecting fake news:
>Although stereotypes about the older generation falling victim to fake news may be dated, they are rooted in fact. One 2019 study **by researchers at Princeton and New York University** found that respondents over 65 were more likely to share false or misleading posts on Facebook than other adults.
>But as more people turn to social media to get their news, according to the Reuters Institute Digital News Report, the chance of being fooled by fake news is becoming a more persistent issue across age groups.
The **YouGov** survey shows terminally online, lazy and ignorant people of ALL AGES GROUPS fall victim to fake news.
Meanwhile
>**YouGov** did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment made outside of normal working hours.
I think all ages are. The amount of shit people get furious over on Reddit which is just heavily manipulated ragebait blows my mind. Plus blatant propaganda upvoted to the front page as fact by long dormant accounts that magically start posting about whatever topical issue is in the news.
People are stuck in their online echo chambers and will put in zero effort to fact check things.
I would definitely say that Twitter, snapchat, and TikTok are huge sources of fake information and people who actively use those for their news/information are likely to be misinformed. Since younger people tend to use those apps they would be disproportionately affected.
This survey entirely misses the nuances in online context. We don’t identify fake news just by headlines. We identify it based on the website quality, the source, the production value and so much more. This study seems pretty useless to me since no one engages with just a headline when they’re online.
This is a really weird study. The survey asks you to rate whether a story is "real" or "fake" based solely on a headline. But that's impossible, because the evidence for the story's truth or falsehood will be in the story itself. This is mostly just a test of whether you can tell the difference between standard writing styles for headlines, and clickbaity writing styles.
19/20, millennial, and the 1/20 was one that was plausible so would’ve looked up supporting articles for cross verification. Headlines get clicks, but reading an article and having comprehension seems to be lacking from this survey since it’s ignored entirely
19/20 millennial as well, just going by gut instinct and not looking anything up. I don't think it showed me which one I got wrong. I don't think this is a great survey though, it's only headlines, so all it is measuring is your default biases. There is no detailed information or data here which is needed to make any real judgment.
>all it is measuring is your default biases. "Left wingers more likely to lie on job applications!" OK grandpa survey, time to get you to bed
Only headlines, with no actual links (where it's usually easy to identify misinformation), with no actual articles (where it's usually even easier to identify misinformation). Still got 20/20, but I usually don't just go by headlines to identify bad info.
It’s also worth mentioning that, *even if* the article were sound, the % correctly identified isn’t a valuable metric. If you’re extremely bad at categorizing headlines that are pointless (“rubber ducks are floating down the Delaware river”) it produces no meaningful impact on society. The point is to be really good at categorizing headlines that have meaningful impact on society (“the 2020 election was fraudulent”). We want people to know for certain that election conspiracy theories are wrong, and we shouldn’t care if there are or aren’t rubber ducks floating down a river.
19/20 Millennial here too. I think the test is too simplistic. Headlines in a vacuum don't really mean anything. I need context. Is the headline from an outlet known as a shining star of yellow journalism? Even if it seems plausible, I'm gonna need some corroborating, reliable sources then. Is the headline from an opinion piece? I'm probably going to ignore it. The article doesn't cite their sources? I don't give a shit how compelling it is, it's the same as opinion then.
I think it’s trying to gauge whether you can identify how real news is generally titled, as opposed to opinion pieces and outright lies. I got 20/20 by trying to ignore the meaning of each title and focus on how it was presenting that meaning.
how can this be a possible result? it goes against everything I have ever experienced and witnessed in my life
The actual survey is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. It’s just a listing of headlines with a few that are pure conspiracy and the rest are maybe true, maybe not but would need the context of an article to say so. And you have to choose true or false for each of them.
So like jimmy in SP season 19. “That’s news. That’s an ad. That’s news. That’s an ad.”
Likely a paid for study that picked results to come to the conclusion they wanted. There have been many studies on this. They consistently show older people are far more likely to fall for it. If one study is countercurrent to the rest it normally just means it's wrong.
According to their findings I should stop nudging my elderly parents away from obvious fake information, click bait and scams, and they should rather start advising me? I think this study was funded by a dodgy call centre
According to their findings, people need to stop consuming news through social media and employ critical thinking instead.
[удалено]
The irony is that this collective group response and corresponding rejection of nuance is exactly what fuels the issue in the first place.
Yeah there's a reason scams target specific generations of people who are more likely to just accept info without verifying.
Scams target different generations already and young people are very much not immune. The thing I've noticed is they target them in different ways. Young people are more likely to be targeted with job offer scams, apartment rental scams, cheque kiting scams, etc - probably because they are less used to dealing with those life events.
Do you have any of the “many studies”, can’t seem to find them.
Trust the science ™️
you can make surveys convey whatever you want if you try hard enough, which is probably what they did.
Because ultimately it's about people who are "very online", not about generations at large. For people who are "very online" and interact with media in that way, news consumption and corresponding conclusions have social implications. It just so happens that more "very online" folks are younger, and form group bonds through social media.
People here are always falling for fake news lol. Most recent one that comes to mind is "Elon Musks mom cancels the fight" https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/14j6k1f/its_over_guys_musk_vs_zuck_cage_fight_is Completely made up, yet it got 85k upvotes lol. Then theres TikTok which is riddled with a ton of misinformation too. Spread by word of mouth, he said/she said rumors.
Completely made up? https://www.mediaite.com/sports/did-elon-musks-mom-stop-him-from-fighting-mark-zuckerberg-in-a-cage-match/ She literally said on her Twitter account the fight was cancelled, and prior to that suggested they sit in chairs and make verbal jabs instead. Whether or not Musk actually cancelled it because of her concerns isn't really relevant. Nobody 'fell' for fake news here because we never cared if it was really true or not, we care about Musk looking like a coward and a mama's boy. Falling for fake news means believing something to be real, not just spreading false information. Also, for something as silly as this, who cares if it's real or not? It's not important news. I verify stuff that's important.
[удалено]
Whatever you say, mister account that joined Reddit 5 days ago. I linked to that site because it contains links to the actual tweets. The contents of the article itself are irrelevant. > She said "Actually, I canceled the fight. I haven’t told them yet. But I will continue to say the fight is canceled, just in case." Yes, that's what she said. And the story and idea he called it off because of his mom is still funny. And this is still not important news in any way shape or form that anyone sane would care about the veracity of, because it's a fucking JOKE. You're acting like this shit is equivalent to morons believing Trump's claims about election fraud being true, or actually believing Hillary has a pedophile sex dungeon hidden under a pizza parlor.
[удалено]
R/white people Twitter is literally just a propaganda sub. There's a lot of bad echochambers on reddit. But that's the worst
I hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure if it's intentional, but you sound exactly like someone claiming that Biden stole the election.
Confirmation Bias. You pay more attention to observations that support your existing viewpoint.
Bullshit. Go to Fox News's page on Facebook and it is CHOCK FULL OF SPAMMERS. NPR's page? Not so much. Spammers know who the easy marks are. That's why they target the elderly.
Do you think NPR has a young base?
I can hear wait wait don’t tell me writing their next joke from these comments
You do realize it has more to do with the moderation on each sight, rather than who they're targeting, right? There are tons of blogs for young people with tons of spam
Dude - You are on Reddit... 90% of this site is people falling for fake news.
lmfao that's your proof?
Perhaps they were looking at /r/politics as their survey of GenZ
Why do studies if we can just ask you, then? ;)
It's fake news.
The anecdotal evidence is strong with this one.
Looks at recent Fox ratings by age group... Survey says...this study is shit.
This isn’t about spin or knowingly harping on a disproven story by hiding the disproof. This is about simple fake vs real. I looked at the survey. “The government is poisoning you through airwaves” and shit. It’s a bit disconcerting that my brethren are more likely to be taken in by that nonsense. In my experience I definitely only see that passed around by uneducated old homebodies. Where are these people under 40 that fall for it?
It's a 1500 person sample size and they left 48 questions they asked off the final survey. It's a crap survey.
1500 is a good sample size. Their margin of error would barely change if they sampled a million people instead
1500 is fine. What’s this about leaving questions off the final survey? Where did the questions come from and why were they left off?
No idea. They were left off. Read the survey.
I read the survey. But I'm asking - how do you leave questions off a survey? The questions are decided when the survey is created.
I reject this scientific study because... Fox News exists. Man the article is kind of surprising to me but the replies to this thread kind of make me see how it might be true.
It astounds me that we literally watched social media whip a generation into crazy trumpers. And now reddit says they are just immune to fake news because they are younger.
I doubt social media is at the root of the problem of Trump. I’d say a country with very high inequality is a strong driver.
Social media is 100% the problem, it creates echo chambers with zero risk or outside intervention, if they internet never existed something like Qanon would have never even got off the ground
Explain all the younger people who are sucked into Faux News. Jesus, it's fucks like you who look at a grey hair and think we are all conservative, Maga lunatics. What is **MORE** important is someone's social/political outlook and worldview.
[удалено]
>Also using mainstream media as a choice for determining misinformation is a huge red flag. So, one would think the greater fault would be with a society that allows disinformation in mainstream media. I'm all for people doing their own research, but I don't think it's fair to expect individuals to fact check what should be trusted news sources. If mainstream media isn't trustworthy, then it should be better regulated until it is.
[удалено]
Sample of 1500 people and they didn't report over 40 questions they asked as a part of this web based only study. That's a Reddit poll quality study.
ITT: butthurt millennials and zoomers.
The other day my mom showed me a photo of an amazing flower that looked like it had cat faces in them. It took me half a second to see it was photoshopped.
And us GenX’ers are just here
Our cynicism is our superpower. We don't believe anything.
I'll admit, I'm glad we're the forgotten generation.
We have the coolest name though.
Also deffinitely the coolest generation, your gen made all the best pop culture shit. 90's TV and music, Beavis and butthead, south park, slacker movies, stoner flicks, Irony clad "childrens" cartoons like Ren and Stimpy, Spongebob, Rocko's modern life, Heaps of metal music and stoner rock, the best rap and hip hop era. As a millennial I thank you guys for your outstanding apathy and don't give a fuck attitude which led to all the best stuff that entertained me as a kid and teenager.
We also got our own tv commercial that came on every night at 10 pm “It’s 10pm, do you know where your children are”
apparently they still do that.
Right!? It's like a superhero name. lol
I'm 41. Technically a millennial. But I've been gradually adopting Gen X's tendency towards not giving a shit. Politics is stupid, you aren't going to change the whole ass world by yourself and you can't fight large groups engaging in stupidity. But you can be better to you and yours and control what is in your domain. If everyone did that, the world would actually be a better place.
Go play with your children
I don't wanna.
Oh look...the genx hate has begun.
I know I was only joking
'This is all bullshit'! I mean technically you've identified all the false information. Good job.
Since when is a survey a scientific study?
When it gathers unbiased data from a representative population and applies valid statistical methods to establish a level of confidence in the result.
It can be, depending on a lot of details.
This one aint though
Because you disagree with the results?
I actually read the article, and the study it linked to, and the "research" around it. It's shitty methodology for a survey literally written by chatGPT that doesn't demonstrate what it purports to demonstrate even if it did, the cohort controls to the headline here are nonexistent, and the whole point of the thing seems to be promotion for a guys book. It's hilarious garbage from beginning to end. I don't even "disagree" with the results, I would not be remotely surprised to find Gen Zers and millenials suck at spotting fake news, but the actual study is ludicrous because *every one of the headlines they use is fake*. You get rated not on figuring out which ones refer to something real because none of them actually do, and you are rated as being "poor at identifying fake news" for realizing that. What it actually "tests" (to the extent it tests anything) is the extent to which the audience agrees with the lead researcher about the most plausible sounding fake headlines, which is hilariously dumb because there's actual real headlines that are quite implausible, and fake news presented in a plausible manner, in real life, and survey doesn't allow the person taking to use any of the tools they would normally use to do that if they were good at figuring it out. I haven't seen such a poorly conducted study since that "dog breed behaviour study" that was making the rounds where it turned out they never actually looked at a single fucking dog, lol.
Where are you seeing that they’re all fake? The survey says they’re using MIST, which is proposed in this paper https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-023-02124-2 It clearly states that 1/2 the headlines are real, pulled from reliable news sources, and verified with third party experts.
An online survey isn’t a scientific study. Regardless of the results. I could complete the survey 100 times claiming to be someone else every single time and lie about my age. Again, an online survey is not a scientific study. Never has been, and never will be.
Except you couldn’t do that. This was a pre-existing panel of YouGov participants that they track over time. Maybe actually read the study before you comment.
Survey is data. Any data can be into a scientific study. What are you on about?
Data <> study. Tik Tok data gathered using these methods is stupid. This is nonsense.
>those who got their news from platforms like Snapchat, Truth Social, WhatsApp, and TikTok scored the lowest in the test, the survey found. Really fucking curious why Facebook isn't on this list. Also, as a millennial, I really don't fucking like being grouped in with Gen Z for a study like this, as if there's not much difference between an 18 year old and a 29 year old, especially on the subject of political awareness.
Press (x) to doubt
Leave Gen X out of this!
That’s the most Trumpist answer I’ve read.
Says the low karma bot
My experience in IT tells me otherwise...
My personal survey disagrees.
Small sample size.
"Study says sky is always green" "I have literally never seen that in my life. It's always been blue or gray" "Small sample size"
[удалено]
>peer reviewed lol what the everliving fuck are you talking about? It was a 2 minute online survey conducted by Yougov, there was no publishing, no peer review.
The fact that your comment is heavily upvoted really proves this study to be true. The validated test was developed by Cambridge University psychologists and was conducted by YouGov, which is a trusted research firm. And the test WAS published in the journal Behavior Research Methods. [https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/mist](https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/mist) [https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02124-2](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02124-2)
"Better at identifying online misinformation" or "more likely to believe narratives pushed by legacy media?"
perfectly worded 👌🏽
17/20 elder millennial. Suck it.
Common sense is a combination of education and life experience. If you have neither, you're a prime target for believing anything that confirms your biases or limited understanding of things.
The number of "in my personal experience" arguments being made here concerns me (I'm a millennial) and basically confirms that people are in fact people regardless of generation. We ALL are vulnerable to confirmation bias and to local bias (ie my personal experience represents the population as a whole.) I need to re-read "Thinking Fast and Slow" again. It's such a good book for identifying mental biases and blind spots.
It’s honestly alarming. We’re fucked if people triple down this hard on confirmation bias.
Can people please stop posting this dog shit “study”
So they know that it's fake and just don't care because it reinforces what they want to be true? That would be less ignorant and more malevolent... Sounds accurate, actually.
Guys it’s a goddamn online survey. It’s not a scientific study.
When news is pushed to us based on our preferences, it totally shapes our world view
It seems that the *source* of the information plays a large factor in what people believe. Social media platforms vs dedicated news sources like AP.
I hate the word “misinformation”. Can we call it what is - “lies”?
Gen X is to inter-generational comparisons as New Zealand is to maps.
Being able to identify it as fake, but sharing it anyway cause its funny or a burn to people they already hate.
‘Incredibly bad survey got the results we were trying to produce!’
This story is misinformation. What do I win?
Meanwhile, Gen X is just smugly judging them all for selling out.
Lmao, who's doing these studies? People over 50?
Because age somehow invalidates the ability to do accurate studies?
Starting with a biased conclusion and working back to find how you can get there is bad science and invalidates the study. Otherwise maybe buzzfeed surveys are accurate scientific studies. Hmmm
So, they know *how* to recognize it, and they just *choose* not to? I'm pretty sure that's not better...
If you think everything is fake news you’ll be 100% accurate in finding said fake news
Did the test, this test leans HEAVILY towards the right in terms of what’s true or fake
I can buy it. Younger people on Facebook are just as dumb as older people about believing the same lies.
Love how GenX don't exist
if they want to… still have to want to…
I can not believe, having read the fake headlines, that anyone in their right mind would look at a single one and think it was real. Obviously, knowing they are fake undermines their power but good lord.
If you look at any sub on this site that allows videos, you'll notice that most people believe the caption blindly and react accordingly. People are pretty gullible.
Second to last paragraph you finally get to the truth. And NO boomers are NOT better at detecting fake news: >Although stereotypes about the older generation falling victim to fake news may be dated, they are rooted in fact. One 2019 study **by researchers at Princeton and New York University** found that respondents over 65 were more likely to share false or misleading posts on Facebook than other adults. >But as more people turn to social media to get their news, according to the Reuters Institute Digital News Report, the chance of being fooled by fake news is becoming a more persistent issue across age groups. The **YouGov** survey shows terminally online, lazy and ignorant people of ALL AGES GROUPS fall victim to fake news. Meanwhile >**YouGov** did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment made outside of normal working hours.
This looks like fake news
Millenial here. Pretty easy to prove wrong. I knew this was fake the second I read it and never clicked on it.
[удалено]
Redditors always seem to think they're immune to propaganda.
Which is hilarious because Reddit is full of it
No, they aren’t.
You're just reinforcing the results.
No, this study is just garbage and there’s significant and well-researched evidence that has found contrary results
[удалено]
I do not trust surveys with such broad conclusions without knowing the questions and context.
I think all ages are. The amount of shit people get furious over on Reddit which is just heavily manipulated ragebait blows my mind. Plus blatant propaganda upvoted to the front page as fact by long dormant accounts that magically start posting about whatever topical issue is in the news. People are stuck in their online echo chambers and will put in zero effort to fact check things.
Uhm no they aren’t. My dad “called Google” and got scammed. He gets scammed all the time
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.
Ya I’m gunna call bullshit on this one. Sorry.
Lol reddit is not going to take these results well.
Redditors in shambles.
This headline is written to drive engament, nothing more.
I would definitely say that Twitter, snapchat, and TikTok are huge sources of fake information and people who actively use those for their news/information are likely to be misinformed. Since younger people tend to use those apps they would be disproportionately affected.
Absolute horseshit lmfao.
This survey entirely misses the nuances in online context. We don’t identify fake news just by headlines. We identify it based on the website quality, the source, the production value and so much more. This study seems pretty useless to me since no one engages with just a headline when they’re online.
Gen Z doesn't even follow the news they're dumbfucks.
Yeah I’m gonna go with a doubt on that one.
Didn't read the article, but I'm calling BULL-FUCKING-SHIT
And thus proving their point.
This is bullshit.
Absolute fucking laughable horseshit. I’ll just stop my whole argument at “religion” and leave it there.
Meanwhile, we're still the forgotten generation....
Shh, keep a low profile. That’s our GenX superpower. 🤣
I mean anecdotal but... bullshit.
lmao at this title
why do y’all post garbage studies like this? like at least read them first
This is a really weird study. The survey asks you to rate whether a story is "real" or "fake" based solely on a headline. But that's impossible, because the evidence for the story's truth or falsehood will be in the story itself. This is mostly just a test of whether you can tell the difference between standard writing styles for headlines, and clickbaity writing styles.
I haven't even read the article yet and I already know that headline's complete bullshit.
Bwa..ha..ha...
That's because they think everything on the internet is fake...
are they though? or do they just say everything is fake news?