Slate “…The article was thrust into the limelight on July 28, when the Commerce Department released data showing that the U.S. gross domestic product had shrunk for a second straight quarter, meeting a common shorthand definition of a recession. Republicans, seeking to highlight the economy’s weakness as part of a case against Democrats ahead of midterm elections this fall, jumped on the news. Although most serious economists do not accept the two quarters shorthand definition, this didn’t stop politicians like Sen. Rick Scott of Florida from declaring that “Joe Biden has officially plunged America into a recession.” The Biden administration, meanwhile, emphasized that the National Bureau of Economic Research, the body responsible for judging recession dates, had not declared one…Wikipedians see neutrality as a core tenet of their work, and have long resisted providing any sort of commentary alongside articles apart from notices about the article itself (such as banners flagging inadequate sourcing).
But in an unprecedented move, editors have placed a notice at the top of the article reading “Please visit the talk page and view the FAQ for questions about this page.” If this notice is adopted elsewhere, it would signal a shift in Wikipedia’s approach, away from letting its work speak for itself and toward a more active, transparent defense of its editorial decisions…”
St. Louis Literary Award
They've announced that Neil Gaiman will receive the 2023 St. Louis Literary Award, a leading American author prize that: "recognizes a living writer with a substantial body of work that has enriched our literary heritage by deepening our insight into the human condition and by expanding the scope of our compassion".
It's been awarded since 1967 -- as the Messing Award through 1981 -- and has a solid list of previous winners.
Gaiman gets to pick up the prize on 13 April 2023.
Who Is Falling for Fake News?
Knowledge At Wharton: “People who read fake news online aren’t doomed to fall into a deep echo chamber where the only sound they hear is their own ideology, according to a revealing new study from Wharton. Surprisingly, readers who regularly browse fake news stories served up by social media algorithms are more likely to diversify their news diet by seeking out mainstream sources.
These well-rounded news junkies make up more than 97% of online readers, compared with the scant 2.8% who consume online fake news exclusively. “We find that these echo chambers that people worry about are very shallow. This idea that the internet is creating an echo chamber is just not holding out to be true,” said Senthil Veeraraghavan, a Wharton professor of operations, information and decisions. Veeraraghavan is co-author of the paper, “Does Fake News Create Echo Chambers?”
It was also written by Ken Moon, Wharton professor of operations, information and decisions, and Jiding Zhang, an assistant operations management professor at New York University Shanghai who earned her doctorate at Wharton. The study, which examined the browsing activity of nearly 31,000 households during 2017, offers empirical evidence that goes against popular beliefs about echo chambers. While echo chambers certainly are dark and dangerous places, they aren’t metaphorical black holes that suck in every person who reads an article about, say, Obama birtherism theoryor conspiracies about COVID-19 vaccines. The study found that households exposed to fake news actually increase their exposure to mainstream news by 9.1%…”
