zlacker

>>bertma+(OP)
It's not what you know, but who you know. Any type of mass-media is fodder for the have-nots, while the haves get their information from trustworthy sources through their in-group. The more addictive facebook, tiktok and twitter are, the bigger the premium is of being part of the right group. Whether the memes you consume are in print is entirely incidental.

>>bux93+d3
Well just change your URL to something better, right. The curse is not the lack of information but the lack of will to change the channel from whatever feeds their (our!) biases.

>>ndjdjd+I3
If drugs flood my community, you can't say the solution is simply "just don't do drugs, duh". If you put the burden on the population when everything in society works against them, it's not productive in any way.

>>mihaic+I6
> you can't say the solution is simply "just don't do drugs, duh"

But that is obviously the solution at the individual level, and it is always productive to put the burden of solving your own problems on yourself like OP suggests.

>>nverno+R8
But it's not an individual problem! Me not doing drugs doesn't prevent me from being impacted by people who do, and the same goes for people who consume poisoned information sources.

>>pjc50+n9
I mean, it's both right? It's easier to work on fixing policy if you're not a drug addict reading poisoned info.

>>nverno+9a
Sure, it is both. And in this type of situations I think the more important one to tackle is the systemic one, so that putting the burden on the individual is made manageable.

To give another analogy, if you want people to recycle, you need to create recycling stations in their area, and not force them to drive 50 kilometers to recycle a plastic bottle. That burden of infrastructure is on the government unfortunately in some part.