This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Journalism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Hi I just finished my peer review and added it as a subsection in your sandbox. Exploredragon (talk) 11:31, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editorializing and unnecessary adjectives

• "Understandably, methods for countering disinformation that involve algorithmic governance raise ethical concerns."^{[according to whom?]}
• "It has been pointed out^{[by whom?]} that social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter have not had strong incentives to control disinformation or to self-regulate" -> maybe change strong to sufficient, or state more factually that they profit from incorrect information that gets clicks
• "Cyber security experts claim that collaboration between public and private sectors is necessary to successfully combat disinformation attacks"

Opinions presented as fact

• "Disinformation is an ethical, social, legal and technological problem"
• "Creating a unified strategy for legislation to deal with information spaces is recommended."
• "Providing accurate information and countering disinformation are legitimate activities of government."

Missing attribution

• "It has been suggested^{[by whom?]} that China and Russia are jointly portraying the United States and the European Union"
• "Blockchain technology has been suggested as a potential defense mechanism against internet manipulation"
• "Democracies should not seek to covertly influence public debate either by deliberately spreading information that is false or misleading or by engaging in deceptive practices, such as the use of fictitious online personas."
• "Further, democracies are encouraged^{[by whom?]} to play to their strengths,^{[neutrality is disputed]} including strong rule of law, respect for human rights, cooperation with partners and allies, soft power, and technical capability to address cyber threats."

(t · c) buidhe 16:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started working on the cleanup, (I am only at the introduction), but @Buidhe is right, the article has a lot of editorializing issues. MexFin (talk) 08:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is disinformation not an ethical, social, legal and technological problem? I can't imagine a situation where disinformation is a good thing, any more than justifying, say, corruption or genocide. -- llywrch (talk) 18:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]